FLM 

2015 

155921 





















* c\J A* + • AV 

°*u <y 

* •«- ^ s) \ rirfSc* •> 


^o* 


■U «> 'NS 3 ~» i 

^ * ® « o 0 


f\ ft 1 


eft ■» © ,\V v ^v>. o ''• * A> vf* j o «V**» 

v a 'V * vjICxr * <& ^ 

a g \ ' • • s 4 <* '*•** G % V *^T* A 

r cr o°!%/o a^ .ftft;* ^ -Or oft"®* ^o a ? •'>“ + 

0 ° ft SjetflZZ*;* % „ c ° A >w^. 

0 A 

ft 


, - WJP v ftA, . 

°ft^*A 0 V* 

c\ ft '">.■> ^ 

o ^ ft .'VfWSifc,'. 


V 

V ft * 

v C- * 


o 

© N 0 ^ 


T V 

• ^ A V * J 

W : ^ 


L% ^ 


o " 


O* 

°« *c 


» / i * 


A' 1- c\ + ^/aj ft ft) 

ft °<p. " ' ' f° v. 

v * ' * °' ft ft >-V', > 

► & * , * «f> /A «* 

L, © r£» /y * ^ 

w v '**# 


Kp <\ * 

^ Cr 


o' AO, 



, 0 ' 


* ' 

- ** 0* 

• « — * 


o N O 


A u ^ '* »To •* ^ 

«<r .•v> > V s 

: :W^\ %<** :k 


' . 

.* / O 7*w*s n o 

, e » o » ^ *•»•>* f 0 

*> V . ’ * »- c\ ^ 

^ \s ' r 


' 4 V 

A^ < 

vf> S 


<* 

.**'*„ 

* * /y/z/A-, _ ^ 

«* «>► , "t> < ^vr \l//v>C? 

2 . . C> V 

CJ ' ,* • 4,0 V*. 

♦ <a ^ O + _0 • <1 1 

. ^ * . . 1 • ^0 *■>.»’ <«* 

> V % .’*•- c> .0 V ,*VL'.» *> v % 

* <6 *Cn A?**’ V^WV* ^ 

• %<* A~ ♦ t{<A§8 /h S* ♦ f\2ms% * ~ 

o Y//M\\V * c**| 




*> V 

* ^ <(, * 

i : vv : ^ 


" ° ' <v 


* <* ^> vP •* ^ 

a - *'•..•* .cr \' ! 

>* *w%i* \ " c° v c 

♦ *° ^ ** 

°o ^ 


V" 


t • o_ 


^ v r 

* *C, ' 

* A V * 

. : vv • 5 


$ 

0 V ..... ^ ••■•*./ 

^ ;xrn 





































Price SO Cents 


JSUr- /» 





CONTENTS. 


The Worcester Races of 1870. 1 

Reports of H. W. Raymond, in N. Y. 
Tunes ; D. J. Kirwan, in N. Y. World ; 
E. P. Clark, in Springfield Republican; 
“ F.,” in Hartford Courant ; W. Blaikie, in 
N. Y. Tribune ; W. M. Olin, in Boston 
Advertiser ; Comments of the Worcester 
Gazette on the Decisions of the Referee ; 
Before the Freshman Race; “Some Cor- 
rections” of “ C.,” in Behalf of Harvard ; 
Reply of W. W. Scranton, in Behalf of 
Yale ; Comments of N. Y. Xation and of 
the N. H. Journal & Courier ; A Harvard 
Demand for a Straight-Away Course. 

The Advocate-Courant Controversy, 13 

Opening Shots of the Advocate , Oct. 14; 
Worcester Once More, Oct. 29 ; Commu- 
nication, Opinions of the Referee, etc., 
Nov. 11 ; Addenda et Corrigenda, Nov. 
19 ; Second Communication, etc., Nov. 25 ; 
Silence gives Consent, Dec. 3 ; A Voice 
from Brown, Dec. 17. 

Official Correspondence, 25 

The Eleven Letters between the Harvard 
andYale Boat Clubs; The Yale Card in 
the Boston Journal ; Explanatory Note by 
the Compiler, 

“ The Rowing Association of American 
Colleges,” 29 

Convention at Springfield ; Advantages of 
the New London Course; Rules and Reg- 
ulations ; The Harvard Advocate on the 
Situation (two articles, June 9 and 23). 


Yale’s Time in the Race of 1865, 33 

Statement of Wilbur Bacon, in Wilkes’s 
Spirit of the Times ; Letter of the Referee, 
(oshua Ward ; Sworn Affidavits of Citizens. 

Historical Outline of the Past, 37 

The First Race at Center Harbor, 1852 ; 
Second at Springfield, 1S55 ; Disaster at 
Springfield, 1858; Organization of Union- 
College Regatta, 1859; Second and Last 
Trial, i860; The Seven University Races, 
1864-70; The Seven Minor Races of this 
Period ; Variation in the Management ; 
How Yale’s Desire for a Straight Race 
grew into a Demand. 

Proposed System for the Future, 40 

The Two Conditions of a Successful Race ; 
The Old Course at Worcester a Bad One ; 
The New Course above Springfield an Un- 
desirable One ; The Regular Springfield 
Course a Good One ; The New London 
Course the Best ; The Question of Hotels ; 
No Necessity for “ Making a Night of It ”; 
Laying out an Immovable Course; The 
Champion Flags ; The Time of the Race 
Fixed without Challenges ; College Races 
Encouraged — None Others Allowed ; Mon- 
ey Wanted to pay Expenses, not as Prizes 
for the Winners ; Boat Racing in the 
Smaller Colleges ; The Cost of University 
Boat-Racing ; How the General College 
Races Should be Managed ; Scientific Un- 
dergraduates on the University Crew of 
Yale? Concluding Appeal. 



) 

# 0 

NEW HAVEN: 


Tiie College Bookstore. Agents. 


TUTTLE, MOREHOUSE X TAYLOR, PRINTERS, 221 STATE STREET. 




EXPLANATORY NOTE. 



The object of the present compilation is chiefly to render accessible the printed 
facts and comments which have made up what has been known as the “ boating 
controversy,” and thus provide against any re-opening or furthur continuance of the 
dispute. Everything has been said that need or well can be said on either side; 
and this pamphlet simply gives a chance to that portion of the public who are inter- 
ested in the matter to learn u what it is all about.” In this way it is believed that 
the danger of the trouble becoming (through ignorance of the facts attending its 
origin) a chronic and traditional one, will be altogether removed. 

It should be understood that the Harvard Advocate is a fortnightly journal, con- 
ducted by editors in the upper classes, who elect their own successors, and that it 
is the only publication of any sort which emanates from the college, or, so far as 
known, from the town of Cambridge itself. On the other hand, the only publica- 
tion avowedly “conducted by the Students of Yale College,” is the Lit., a monthly 
magazine, whose five editors are annually chosen by and from the senior class. 
There is also a weekly paper, the Yale C our ant, edited by three Seniors whom 
the proprietors, Chatfield & Co., employ for that purpose, which is read by all the 
undergraduates. The College Courant is a weekly paper, owned and issued by the 
same publishers, which few of the undergraduates ever read, and which in no 
sense represents them or the college. All the editorials in regard to boating which 
are here reprinted from the latter paper, were written by a single individual, a grad- 
uate of ’69, who took no counsel or advice concerning them from any member of 
the college, much less gained their “authorization” and “endorsement” in advance. 
The Yale Lit. and Yale Courant can hardly be said to have taken part at all in 
the “controversy,” and none of their few remarks have been thought worth re- 
printing. 

The attention of editors, — especially of college editors, — of boating men, and 
indeed of all persons who are interested ip the future success of college aquatic 

/ i i 

< f v ... 

sports, is particularly drawn to the concluding division of the pamphlet, where a 
complete history of boating contests in the past is presented, and a definite plan for 
conducting the University races hereafter, is marked out at considerable length. 


Gilt 

Editor 


’08 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


THE WORCESTER RACES OF 1870. 


[Special Cor. N. Y. Times, July 23.1 
THE FRESHMAN RACE. 

At 4 P. M. the pistol was tired again to 
bring out the Freshman crews who were to 
participate in the great aquatic struggle. The 
judges for the college races were at the stake- 
boat — Yale, A. L Clark, 1858 ; Harvard, W. 
Blaikie, 1866; Amherst, J. A. Deady, 1864 ; 
Brown, Stock well, 1872. Upper-boat — 
Yale, G. Adee, 1867 ; Harvard, G. H. Gould, 
1872 ; Amherst, Blew ; Brown, S. Brownell, 
1872. The referee at the stake-boat was E. 
Brown, Worcester; the starter, Elliott; time- 
keeper, Pratt. The boats were long in 
putting in an appearance, causing a delay 
annoying to those standing in the hot sun. 
In the choice of positions the Amherst crew 
got the inside, Brown second, Yale third, 
Harvard last. At length, after repeated sum- 
mons from the judges, enthusiastic yells from 
the assembled crowd, Brown’s light boat shot 
under the bridge ; next came the Red Caps 
(Harvard); then Amherst, and Yale’s oars- 
men last. As is often the case when many 
boats start, each was so jealous of the other 
that they were a long time in getting into 
position. To add to the vexations of the 
moment, just as the crews were nicely fixed, 
Harvard did some damage to her outrigger, 
and was obliged to put back for repairs. All 
the crews looked finely, and came barebacked 
to the scratch. The Harvard crew seemed de- 
cidedly the heaviest, and Brown the lightest. 
At length the word came : “ Ready, go ;” and 
amid enthusiastic shouts from those present 
the boats shot off like arrows from the bow. 
The start was splendid — all getting off well 
together, the Brown boys pulling a beautiful 
stroke, the Harvards a trifle unsteady, the 
Yale men moving like clockwork, and Am- 
herst working well together. The Harvards 
drew ahead after the start, closely followed 
by Yale, while Brown and Amherst were 
having a fight to themselves some distance 
oft. Amherst steered very wildly. Yale was 
pulling forty-eight strokes, Amherst forty, 
Harvard forty-five. As they passed out of 
sight they seemed very close together, Brown 
leading. The excitement was tremendous. 
The air was rent with wild cheers from the 
members of the different colleges stationed 


along the shore. The boats crossed the line ; 
Brown first, by 24 seconds, Yale next, Har- 
vard third, and Amherst way in the distance. 
Brown’s time was 19:21, Yale’s 19:45, Har- 
vard’s 20, Amherst not taken. The race was 
pretty close and interesting, and cheer after 
cheer greeted the victorious crew. Again, 
however, did foul proceeding unsettle the 
mind. Harvard claimed foul on Yale in 
having crowded her into the shore and strik- 
ing her boat. Yale claimed that she was 
ahead of Harvard at the time. Harvard also 
complained that Walter Brown interfered 
in directing the Yale men how to steer. Not 
to be behind her elder universities, Amherst 
also claimed foul on Brown, for running into 
her and taking away her rudder, when she 
was ahead. So again were rewards of vic- 
tory denied, and complainants summoned to 
an evening conclave to hear the final decision 
of the referee. 

the university race. 

At 5^ the University crews were sum- 
moned to appear and meet again in the 
annual contest for the championship. Again 
delay, tedious and unpleasant, but relieved 
at length by the appearance of the superb- 
looking Harvard crew. Cheers greeted them, 
loud and long. For, be it known, Worcester 
crowds on regatta day are all well red , and 
their sympathies and wishes are never for a 
moment doubtful or kept quiet. Then 
appeared the Yale crew, and certainly a finer- 
looking or better crew, so far as outsiders 
could judge, has seldom come upon waters 
like Ouinsigamond — I mean as regards their 
style and appearance, not as regards their 
strength. The Yale men were all bare as to 
their frames, while Harvards clothed their 
nakedness with white shirts. The start was 
firstrate, both crews dropping their oars at 
the same moment. Yale, with her usual luck, 
having won the outside position, they started 
oft', pulling about the same number of strokes 
— forty-four — and keeping close together. 
As they passed Regatta Point they were 
greeted with all the noise that brass and 
drum, powerfully reinforced by thousands of 
pairs of lungs, could make; while the ladies 
waved handkerchiefs and shouted to them- 


2 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing . 


selves for very joy. On sped the boats, the 
same steady, sturdy, determined rowing, and 
neither a pistol-shot from the other. When 
the boats had reached the mile stake it was 
seen that their course was taking them right i 
into the shore. Harvard perceived her mis- 1 
take early and bettered her condition ; but 
Yale kept steadily on, so that when her 
course was changed she lost fully ten 
seconds. Harvard thus took the lead, and 
turned the stake first. The boats then passed 
well nigh out of sight from the judges’ 
boat. That Yale was doing nobly all felt ; 
and Yale stock began to rise above par. 
And its rise rivaled that of gold in war times 
when, on the reappearance of boats, Yale was 
seen in the van, Harvard close in to west 
shore ; still the same steady stroke, about 
thirty-eight to the minute. Then came loud 
cheers, filling the air with enthusiastic shouts 
for “ Yale,” “ Yale,” and amid cries of “ Spurt 
her, Phelps,” “Bully for you, boys,” Yale 
shot across the line and for the first time in 
five years, the Blue came in ahead of the 
Magenta. The Harvard crew followed, in 20 
minutes and 30 seconds, but, as was seen, 
minus the important instrument known as a 
rudder. Not to be behind the precedents of 
the afternoon, she at once put in a claim of 
foul. Yale had crossed her bows and run 
into her. So the Yale crew were called up 
and allowed to state plainly their side of the 
question. This was that the Harvard crew, 
in turning the stake, carried away the flag 
and broke their rudder on the stake. They 
(Yale) also ran on to the stake, and the 
crash of their boat striking the stake and 
Harvard’s breaking her rudder, were so 
simultaneous that Harvard was deceived in 
belief that Yale had run into them. So 
another question was referred to the judges 
and the referee, whose decision has not yet 
been made. It was curious to notice how 
little enthusiasm was manifested at Yale’s 
success ; while if the Red but crosses the 
line first, and poems and songs of thankgiv- 
ing rend the air. However, the decision 
may be given to the Yale crew with but few 
words of encouragement to urge them on. 
The) r have done their work nobly, and Yale 
men to-night are a happy and jolly set of 
fellows. 


THE EXCITEMENT AT EVENING. 

Nine o'clock P. M . — As I write the large 
hall of the Bay State Hotel is filled with 
students, singing alternately the songs of 
their Alma Mater, and waiting with toler- 
able good humor for the decision of the 
arbiters of the victors’ laurels, who are now 
closeted in room No. 8. The feeling in the 
city is very great. Knots of men are stand- 
ing in the streets, discussing the probable 
results and reviewing the features of the 
various races. I have forgotten to allude to 
the only really unpleasant occurrence of 
the day, which took place on the judges’ 
boat, in which two gentlemen displayed con- 


siderable temper, and high words passed 
between them ; the result was that one of the 
parties knocked down the other. It is hard 
to tell where the matter will end, if it ends at 
all. The decision of the umpire has just 
been made known, and to the surprise of 
every one, the champion flags are awarded 
to the Harvard crew. As the session of the 
judges was held with closed doors, the rea- 
sons leading to this decision are not known. 
The Yale crew are much incensed at this. 
And as they deem it an entirely unjust deci- 
sion, they challenge the Harvards to row the 
race over again to-morrow ; but the Har- 
vards had not the necessary courage to 
accept. So they take the flags, while Yale 
protests against the decision. Brown wins 
the Freshman race. In closing, I can only 
repeat that every effort should be made to 
remove these annual races from this city to 
some place where prejudice does not run so 
strong. Another matter, with reference to 
the selection of unprejudiced men as judges, 
which is much talked of to-night, I shall not 
discuss at this hour. — [Henry \V. Ray- 
mond, Yale, ’69. 


[Special Correspondence N. Y. World.] 

THE FRESHMAN RACE. 

In getting position, Amherst drew the in- 
side, Brown second, Yale third, and Harvard 
the outside. Brown first made its appear- 
ance, then Harvard, then Amherst, and at 
last Yale. Each crew wore its distinctive 
colored handkerchiefs. The boats were all 
in line when Harvard discovered that they 
had broken an outrigger and were obliged to 
return to their boat-house for a short time. 
On coming back the word was given at 5:05 
and the boats made a splendid start, all go- 
ing off with a very quick stroke, Harvard 
and Brown taking about their usual stroke, 
while Yale came next, Harvard third, and 
Amherst last. They came in as follows : 
Brown, 19.21 ; Yale, 19.45 ; Harvard, 20. 
Harvard and Yale claimed foul on each 
other, Amherst met with an accident on the 
way down and did not get in for some time. 
In fact, all the crews which rowed on Ouin- 

cv 

sigamond to-day accused each other of foul- 
ing or doing something that was very un- 
gentlemanly. When Amherst got back to 
the judges’ boat it appeared that their rudder 
was broken off, and they claimed that the 
Browns fouled them, knocking them, caus- 
ing the damage. Brown denied the foul, and 
claims that if there was one it was due to 
Amherst, who cut off their water. 

The race was given to Brown by the re- 
feree. Everyone seemed dissatisfied with 
everybody else, and everybody else wanted 
to knock everyone on the head. To add to 
the confusion, a man on the judges’ boat 
said that another man had treated him like a 
boy at Springfield — but why at Springfield I 
could not learn. Whereupon the party of 
the first part declared that the party of the sec- 


The Worcester Races of 1870 . 


3 


ond part was a liar. The party of the second 
part didn’t like this, and went to the back 
part of the miserable old scow and took two 
glasses of whiskey and water, and then re- 
flected, and finally came forward and thus 
addressed the party of the first part : 

“You have called me a liar, sir. Do you 
know, sir, what a fearful significance that 
word has? Are you aware, sir, of the fearful 
loss of reputation which a man sustains when 
he utters such a word as that, sir? I have 
been many years in the world, sir, but I 
would not call an unborn babe a liar, sir. 1 
am entirely too inoffensive, sir ; and now, sir, 
I leave you crushed.” 

And he went away and took two glasses 
of weak water and whiskey, but every now 
and then he would jump up and scream out, 
“ He has called me a liar. Oh, why was I 
born. Look at his legs, sir — look at his um- 
brella. Look at his coat, sir. Do you mean 
to tell, sir, that the man who wears only four 
buttons on the front of his coat, one of which 
is frogged, can he be an honest man?” 

Finally the party of the first part became 
indignant at being badgered in this truly 
amusing manner, and he sprung forward, 
and putting out his right mauly, he struck 
the party of the second part a blow in the 
eye which knocked him into the bottom of 
the boat, the sudden jerk nearly upsetting 
the crazy old craft, to the horror of the coun- 
try reporters, two of whom screamed fire at 
the shock. He then got upon his feet and 
said: “You have done a noble thing, sir. 
You have shown yourself to be a very plucky 
man, and I respect you for it. Please ac- 
cept my thanks.” After this effort the party 
of the second part subsided and was heard 
of no more during the day. 

Taking advantage of the interval which 
elapsed between the races of the freshman 
and university crews, I took a look around 
the lake. I never before saw such an im- 
mense number of people at Ouinsigamond 
during a race. It seemed as if all the mov- 
ing and rolling and trotting and running 
stock of New England were present. The 
trees were full of people. The housetops 
and the bridge, the banks of the lake, the 
grand stand, and all other available spots 
were swarming with eager sightseers. 

THE UNIVERSITY RACE. 

A pistol was fired, and the Harvard Uni- 
versity crew, naked to their waists and hav- 
ing their heads covered with red handker- 
chiefs, came out from under the bridge, and 
ranging themselves along side of the boat, 
were loudly cheered. Lyman was leaning 
forward at the stroke, his barrel-like body 
bent forward and his face hardened for a 
tough and long race. Jones, who pulled 
number two, had a weather-beaten, old maid- 
ish face, and held the most of his oar like a 
leg of pork, as if he feared it would slip 
through his fingers. Willis, number 3 of the 
crew, from a side view which I got of his 


body, looked like a large barrel of beer, and 
he seemed to oppress the frail boat by his 
gigantic size. His face was freckled, and his 
whole bearing was that of a man who could 
row if he stood on his head to do it. McCobb 
was the finest-faced man in the boat, having 
a good eye and a bright look, which inspired 
confidence, McCobb pulled four, and Rus- 
sell five. Russell had a quiet, gentlemanly 
look, and Reed, who pulled six or bow-oar, 
was evidently the sharpest and most wiry of 
the crew, after Lyman, who looked exactly 
as he did the day he pulled against Oxford, 
only that he seemed more seasoned and more 
confident. 

Yale now forged up, Bone pulling stroke 
and Phelps bow. In the boat Cushing sat 
his seat as firm as a rock, and looked out of 
his clear, dark blue eyes with a fearless and 
gallant look that gained him friends among 
all the bystanders. McCook, too, was as 
merry as a lark, and Flagg, the shortest man 
in reach in the boat, but as stout as any, 
seemed quite collected and unaffected by the 
huzzas and cheers which the gallant bearing 
of the Yale crew called forth from all the 
spectators who were not sympathizers of 
Harvard ; for the tide is beginning to turn in 
New England, and the constant successes of 
the crews have stimulated a feeling which 
was manifested in favor of Yale by those who 
would like to see the under dog win for one 
race at least. Yale had to-day determined 
to win, and was not going to turn away any 
chance, if she knew it. Reed, the Harvard 
bow, seemed to know that Yale meant busi- 
ness, for he clamored for an interval of three 
to five seconds between the words “ are you 
ready ” and “go,” which were to be given by 
Elliott, the starter of the race. The word 
Go ! was given at last, and Harvard and Yale 
dashed away in magnificent style, Yale on 
shore and working beautifully, while Har- 
vard broke up a good deal after five lengths 
had been pulled by them, Lyman seeming to 
have the burden of the boat on his back. 
Harvard pulled a stroke of forty-six to 
forty-eight, and Yale pulled about twenty- 
nine, but the stroke of Yale was a longer 
one and did more execution, and at the first 
three quarters of a mile Yale led, and led 
nobly, Phelps steering his boat in shore for 
the turn with a good deal of judgment and 
coolness. There was a great hub-bub and 
great cheering at the grand stand for Har- 
vard, but the work was being done almost 
entirely by Lyman and Reed, the men in the 
waist of the boat. Walter Brown met his 
crew at the mile stake in his wherry, and 
shouted: “Well done, Yale. Well done, 

Bone. That’s your stroke. Hit her up, old 
Cushing. Dip your oar a little more, Flagg. 
Don’t be afraid, boys. Thirty-nine strokes 
are better than forty. Well steered, Phelps. 
You have got the race sure.” 

Yale did pull and nobly contested every 
inch, going away from her course for a short 
distance to give herself a better chance at the 


4 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing . 


stake-boat, which both boats were now near- 
ing with magnificent speed. The stake-boat 
was two piers of wood about four feet long, 
fastened in the shape of a cross, and in the 
centre of this cross a piece of timber about 
four feet high was fastened, with a flag at the 
top. At this stake it seems the Harvard boat 
struck her bow and unshipped her rudder, 
which was carried along, Harvard being at 
that time leading Yale by about half a boat’s 
length. Almost at the same instant Yale 
was upon the stake-boat, and their boat col- 
lided with the stake, Harvard going away 
around to get the lead for the mile and-a-half 
home-stretch. Some idiot in the mile and-a- 
half stake-boat, cried out, “ Don’t pull any 
more, Harvard ; Yale’s fouled you.” But the 
Harvard crew kept on pulling, and did not 
then heed the advice of the obscure indivi- 
dual, which is an evidence that they did not 
believe that they had been fouled at all. Yale 
then led and pulled as if their lives depend- 
ed upon it, coming down the course, like 
grey-hounds let loose at a hare. Away they 
dashed with tremendous long stroke, Har- 
vard still pulling, but very faintly ; the men 
a good deal broken and pumped, and in an- 
other moment Yale had touched the tow line. 
The gun was fired, and Yale stood victors of 
the university race, having made the course 
of three miles in 18 minutes and 45 seconds, 
which is splendid time. — [David j. Kirwan. 


[Special Cor. Springfield Republican.] 

Amherst took the water first and at Regat- 
ta Point was slightly ahead, the other three 
boats being nearly even. All the crews 
started off with a very quick stroke, Amherst 
and Yale pulling 48, and Harvard and Brown 
56 to the minute. As the boats went out of 
sight Amherst was still keeping its lead, and 
seemed to stand the best chance for winning, 
when, about a mile up the lake, their boat fouled 
the Browns, breaking off their rudder and 
putting them at once out of the race. At al- 
most the same time Harvard and Yale also 
fouled, and after this unfortunate occurrence 
the boats kept on their way up the lake, and 
Brown came in first, making the 3 miles in 
19:21, Yale following in 19:35. Harvard 
came third, and Amherst after a long time 
appeared, greatly delayed by the loss of its 
rudder. Yale and Harvard each claimed a 
foul on the other, and Amherst on Brown. 
After some discussion the decision was post- 
poned till evening when the referee awarded 
the race to Brown. 

And now came the great event of the day, 
the university race between Harvard and 
Yale. Here again there was a tedious delay, 
and it was past 6 before the boats were on 
the water. Harvard won the toss and the in- 
side position. A very even start was made, 
but Harvard, as usual, by its rapid stroke of 
48 per minute, soon shoved a little ahead, 
Yale pulling 43. But the Harvards could 
gain no great advantage, and as they came 


to the stake, were but a length or so ahead. 
And here occurred another unfortunate foul. 
As the Harvards came up to the stake, their 
bow caught upon it. Unluckily Yale did 
not perceive this until too late, and, before 
their boat could be stopped, it had hit the 
Harvard’s bow and broken its rudder wires, 
so as to make the rudder entirely unservice- 
able. After finally rounding the stake, Yale 
rapidly gained on its rival and finished the 
three miles in 18:45. Harvard was much de- 
layed by its inability to use its rudder, and 
its time was consequently 20:30. Imme- 
diately on reaching the judges’ boat they 
claimed a foul on Yale. After some discus- 
sion the final hearing of the case was post- 
poned until evening when the referee award- 
ed the race to Harvard on account of the foul 
by Yale. Immediately upon the announce- 
ment of the decision, Yale challenged Har- 
vard to row another race, Saturday or any 
day next week, but the Harvards pleaded 
vacation engagements and declined. 

Much dissatisfaction is felt by the Yale 
men at the decision, not because it was 
against them, but because they claim that 
the umpire was prejudiced in favor of Har- 
vard. In proof of this they point to the fact, 
to which I can bear witness that he declined 
to hear any evidence on a claim which Yale 
brought against Harvard, that the latter 
veered out of a direct course, and drove her 
in to the shore. Such an act, if proved, 
would, according to boating rules every- 
where, have ruled Harvard out of the race, 
and Yale justly complains that the referee 
would hear no testimony at all on the ques- 
tion. Brown is of course overjoyed at its 
success, and the only regret is that Amherst 
was unable to keep on as it had surprised 
all by its splendid pulling. Aside from these 
fouls, the only unpleasant feature of the day 
was a quarrel on the judges’ boat between 
William Blaikie, Harvard’s judge, and Char- 
les A. Chase, one of the Worcester commit- 
tee of arrangements. From a most trivial 
cause these two gentlemen became enraged 
at each other, and from high words proceed- 
ed to blows, the celebrated Harvard oarsman 
knocking Chase down, when others inter- 
fered and prevented an}- further continuance 
of this disgraceful contest. — [Edward P. 
Clark, Yale, ’70. 


[Special Cor. Hartford Courant.] 

THE UNIVERSITY RACE. 

The Harvards, with their bare backs and 
Magenta handkerchiefs, made their appear- 
ance first, and were greeted with hearty 
cheers. Yale soon after made their appear- 
ance with bare backs, and wearing blue 
handkerchiefs. Harvard drew the inside. 
All was now excitement, anxiously awaiting 
the word which should send them on their 
struggle. At the word, they both took the 
water at the same time. Harvard has usually 
taken the water first, but Yale was not 


The Worcester Races of 1870 . 


5 


caught napping, and made a good start. 
They kept well together up to the grand 
stand, when Harvard took a slight lead, fol- 
lowed closely by Yale. Harvard soon fell 
back, and was lapped by Yale, who passed 
her. Harvard then made a spurt, caught up 
with Yale, and passed her, Harvard all the 
while crowding the Yale towards the east 
bank. At the stake, Harvard had crowded 
the Yale nearly on to the east bank ; and 
quite a distance from the stake Harvard 
made a quick turn, almost at right angles 
with the stake, and in turning hugged the 
stake. Yale made a turn at the same time, 
endeavoring to come inside of the Harvards, 
almost lapping her. The Harvards, in their 
turn, stuck their oars under the stake boat, 
and their rudder struck it, and after the turn 
remained motionless by the side of it. The 
Yale held her water twice to avoid a foul ; 
but, supposing that the Harvards would give 
way after turning, and would not jockey her 
on the turn, started, and, as is claimed by 
Harvard and denied by Yale, struck the 
wire connecting the rudder. The Yale, after 
the turn, immediately took the lead, and 
kept it to the end, crossing the line in 18.45 ; 
Harvard 20.10. 

At the judges’ stand there was quite a 
scene. Claims of foul were made, enlivened 
by the gentlemanly Blaikie knocking down 
one of the judges. The referee, hearing the 
claim of foul by the Harvards, was disposed 
to allow it on the spot ; but the impropriety 
of deciding a question without evidence and 
against a party unheard was suggested, and 
he reserved his decision till 84 - in the evening. 

The Yale rowed in front of the grand 
stand, and cheers upon cheers greeted them. 
The friends of Yale were jubilant, as the 
victory was unexpected. The Yale rowed a 
very fine stroke, using back and legs with 
great effect. The Yale pulled not over 44 
strokes to the minute, while the Harvards 
pulled the quick stroke of 46 to 48. Yale 
pulled a waiting race, keeping the Harvards 
up to her pace all the way up, while the 
Harvard was but a series of spurts, falling 
back every time they settled to their 
regular stroke. Lyman, no doubt, had 
exhausted his crew. He had called upon 
them all the way up, and they had responded 
gallantly, but he couldn’t shake off the gal ; 
and Bone was coolly biding his time on the 
home stretch. The unusual conduct of the 
Harvards in waiting at the stake after their 
turn, when they should have been on their 
way home, admits of but one construction. 
They were exhausted, and were waiting to 
get strength. Yale, after her hard fought 
and well deserved victory, was to be cheated 
out of it by a most contemptible decision of 
the referee. 

A LIVELY SCENE AT THE BAY STATE HOUSE. 

At 8^ o’clock the Yale and the Harvards, 
with their witnesses, were in waiting for the 
referee, but no referee was to be found. 


Under the charge of the ubiquitous Blaikie, 
he soon made his appearance. Mr. Reed, 
the bow of the Harvard, was soon dis- 
covered having the confidential ear of Mr. 
Edwin Brown, of Worcester, the referee. 
Objection was made by Owen, of the crew 
of ’59, that the evidence should be given 
publicly, that the Yale might have an oppor- 
tunity to refute it. This was yielded, and 
the examination commenced. As a fair 
sample of the impartiality of the trial, and 
the honor of this Worcester referee, the first 
question put by him to Reed of the Har- 
vards was, “ Didn’t you see the Yale foul 
the Harvards?” With a smile, he replied, 
“ Yes.” This was followed by another. 
“Won’t you state how the Yale fouled the 
Harvards?” Then followed quite an excit- 
ing discussion. The Yale offered evidence 
to show that the Harvards fouled their oar, 
and violated one of their own rules in 
crowding them out of their course. This 
was promptly ruled out. The Yale men 
withdrew in disgust. How there could be 
found in all Worcester so weak and vacillat- 
ing a man, so ignorant of all rules of boat- 
ing, 1 cannot understand. The referee, with 
a good deal of gusto, delivered the decree, 
giving Harvard the race. Thus ends this, 
and 1 trust the last, regatta that will ever be 
held at Worcester. The old town can now 
go to sleep again for another year, yes, and 
forever. 

[Special Cor. N. Y. Tribune.] 

THE FRESHMAN RACE. 

The city of Worcester offered some local 
races, which were soon and easily disposed 
of, after a long delay, during which the band 
at the grand stand entertained the assem- 
bled multitude. Out from a little opening 
under the . rustic causeway shot a party of 
half a dozen bronzed, hardy-looking young 
fellows, in a frail, slender craft, and, pad- 
dling leisurely over, pulled up by the judges’ 
boat ; very quickly after, three other crews, 
looking not unlike this first one, followed 
her example, and lay on their oars until they 
find what positions their representatives have 
drawn for them. These are the pets and 
pride of the youngest class of each of New 
England’s four best known seats of learning. 
A slight accident to one of the Harvard’s 
outriggers detained them a few minutes 
longer, but at last they were off. In another 
minute they were dashing past the grand 
stand, and were soon half wa)' up the Lake. 
Amherst and Brown came near together, and 
then again diverged on the opposite shore. 
Harvard and Yale did likewise, but not till 
after the former was actually forced to scrape 
the eastern shore of the lake with its star- 
boards. Brown was first at the stake, but 
Amherst turned inside. Brown came in 
first, in 19.21 ; Yale next, in 19.45 ; Harvard 
third, in 20 minutes ; and Amherst, rudder- 
less and last. 


6 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing . 


THE UNIVERSITY RACE — A FOUL. 

The picked crews of the universities came 
out soon after the Freshman race, and 
backed up to the line, Harvard at the inside. 
The word came, and they bounded away up 
the lake, the Cambridge men doing 48 good 
strokes a minute to the 46 for Yale. At the 
grand stand Cambridge was almost clear, 
and in the second minute they settled to 46, 
in the next to 44, and held this up to the 
stake, which they reached nearly three 
lengths ahead of Yale. When half turned 
about, the Cambridge boat was run down by 
that of Yale, the tiller carried away, and the 
board at the stroke’s feet was stove in. His 
watch tumbled on the floor. Yale led on 
the home-stretch, and her maimed rival, skit- 
ting along the western shore, got home as 
best she could. The New Haven men 
crossed the line in 18.45, considerably in 
advance. After a prolonged discussion, the 
referee, Mr. Edwin Brown, of Worcester, late 
in the evening, gave the flags to Harvard. 
Yale’s quickly following challenge to row to- 
morrow or next week is declined by Har- 
vard, as Lyman of the latter cannot possibly 
remain. The referee has not yet settled the 
less important fouls claimed in the first race. 
— [William Blaikie, Harvard, ’66. 


[Special Cor. Boston Advertiser.] 

THE FRESHMAN RACE. 

The following was the list of judges for 
the college races : — William Blaikie, of 
Washington, for Harvard ; A. L. Clarke, of 
Newton, for Yale; John A. Deadv, of New 
York, for Amherst ; George A. Stockwell, of 
Worcester, for Brown. Referee, Edwin 
Brown, of Worcester. Mr. Charles B. 
Elliott, the boat-builder, was expected to 
act as starter, but he did not appear to 
assume that office. In his place, Mr. 
Blaikie, whose ringing voice has pro- 
nounced the initial words for so many well- 
contested races, again appeared with the 
crimson colors in his button-hole, and called 
the Freshmen to the line. 

The Brown crew was the first to glide 
from beneath the causeway, and was very 
promptly on hand. The men wore brown 
silk handkerchiefs, of the exact tint of their 
shell, which was a trifle darker than that of 
the Amherst crew. The Harvard s were the 
second to appear ; and Luther, the coach of 
the Brown crew, was also seen in waiting, 
in a single skull of his own. Amherst came 
up next, in purple handkerchiefs ; and the 
blue-capped Yale crew were the last to seat 
themselves in their shell. As they pulled 
up to the judges’ boat, their positions were 
announced to them thus : Amherst inside, 
Brown second, Yale third, and Harvard on 
the outside. The Amhersts looked satisfied 
at their favorable position, as well they 
might. The Harvards, on receiving, the 
announcement, sturdily pulled out to their 
place nearest the eastern shore. In getting 


into line, the crews crowded too near the 
judges’ boat. First the Browns, who were 
on the alert, and perhaps the handsomest six 
of them all, had to move over to give the 
Amherst crew the space to which they were 
entitled, and then Yale was required to give 
Brown forty feet additional, in order that 
there might be no chance of fouling at the 
start. Suddenly, when they were nearly 
together, and prepared for the word, the 
Harvards backed oft' with a broken out- 
rigger, and were given ten minutes to pull 
back to their boat-house and repair it. Then 
Blaikie shouted the words, “ You had better 
all come into the shade,” which met with a 
quick compliance, and in two minutes the 
three remaining shells were hugging the cool 
western shore. Pretty soon Harvard came 
back with out-riggers all right, and the 
others at once answered to the call back to 
the line. Brown was the last to get ready, 
and when they were floating almost exactly 
abreast, Blaikie gave them the sonorous 
summons, “Are you ready?” and then, 
without waiting three seconds for the 
response, he belched forth “ Go ! ” Then 
they were off, and the first manifestation of 
real enthusiasm along the shores broke out 
upon the lake. At once the contest grew 
absorbing and interesting. The race was in 
fact divided into two contests — one between 
Amherst and Brown along the centre, and 
gradually to the western side of the lake ; 
the other between Yale and Harvard against 
the western shore. The start was very even, 
though Harvard probably suffered a loss of 
a few feet by having the word last of all. 
As the crews separated in the centre, the 
Amherst boys pulled with all their might for 
the ascendancy over Brown, and what was 
the surprise at the grand stand, as they 
passed, to see the Amherst shell steadily 
gain upon its opponent, which was mean- 
while crowding out well to the western 
shore ! The Amhersts pulled well together, 
and when just above the point daylight 
shone between them. Over against the 
opposite shore a similar contest was going 
on. Yale was crowding Harvard far, far 
towards the bank, and a gap of more than a 
hundred feet lay between the Yale boat and 
the Brown. When a quarter of the way up 
the Amherst crew, being clear of its antago- 
nist, essayed a divergence to the right, as if to 
get away from the jutting shore. It was an 
indiscreet movement, and an unfortunate 
one for them, for they turned too quickly 
and too far, and the Brown shell came driv- 
ing after them, and, alas for their hopes of 
victory, the prow of the other caught their 
rudder, and tore it from its pivot. That was 
a disaster indeed, and in a few moments the 
Brown boys, buckling to their work, went 
ahead, and left the others to their ill-deserved 
defeat. Very soon after this there was foul- 
ing on the western shore. The Yales pushed 
Harvard in against the midway concave of 
the lake there, and held them until, after 


The Worcester Races of 1870 . 


7 


touching oars, the former went ahead, and 
won the advantage which they sought. 
Meantime, Walter Brown was coaching the , 
Yales vociferously. Amherst and Harvard 
having been thus disposed of, the race was 
then and thenceforth between Brown and 
Yale. Before the fouling, the Amhersts 
and Yales both pulled 45 strokes per minute 1 
for a short distance, while Brown and Har- 
vard pulled not more than 40. No further 
effort was made by Amherst after the foul, 
but Harvard kept on in the contest. The 
Yales went up to the stake about a boat’s 
length ahead, pulling 45 strokes a minute, 
the Browns following in splendid form with 
42. In rounding the stake, the Yales shot 
by too far, and the Browns, narrowly escap- 
ing a foul, made an admirable turn inside, 
hugging the stake, and got off witli a lead 
of nearly a length. Then they hit her up to 
the tune of 44 a minute, while Yale barely 
held her own with 42. The Harvard s round- 
ed about fifteen seconds behind, and started 
down pluckily, but in wretched form. The | 
Amhersts did not get around lor several 
minutes after, pulling as though they had 
plenty of time to spare. This state of affairs 
was not radically changed for the remainder 
of the race. When the crews became dis- 
tinguishable from the lower part of the lake, 
Brown was pulling bravely and boldly down 
the centre, while Yale was a good ways 
apart from them on the western side, and 
Harvard was seen further in the rear, on the 
other Hank of Brown. The shout that went 
up from the grand stand, and along the lower 
shore, was somewhat like a yell when the | 
brown handkerchiefs came plainly in view 
far in advance, and evidently the winning- 
color. The Browns bore straight down to 
the line, and crossed it, very near the judges’ 
boat, in 19 minutes 21 seconds. Yale lol- 
lowed to the shoreward 24 seconds after- 
ward, and several lengths in the rear. The 
Harvards, when they came, pulled down on 
the other side of the judges, making 20 
minutes exactly. Then it was that, .amid 
anxious enquiries for Amherst, a small 
speck was seen on the upper lake, which 
gradually grew into the form and shape of 
the missing, belated crew. Harvard at once 
hauled to, and in a manner which betokened 
not a particle of excitement, claimed a foul 
by the Yales. While they were explaining 
their situation, Lyman said, “ Look at mv 
oar,” and held up his spruce with the copper 
torn from the tip. The Browns were exult- 
ant over their victory, but maintained their 
nonchalance, and got themselves cool by 
drinking potations of iced claret, which the 
judges’ boat afforded. Then they pulled oft' 
to the grand stand for the plaudits again, 
and the Amhersts finally arrived, and claimed 
a foul from the Browns ; but even this they 
were almost too careless to enforce, and they 
pulled their rudderless shell, handsomest of 
all the freshman boats, away to their boat- 
house, without manifesting a particle of the 


pertinacity and vehemence in pressing their 
grievance which characterized the others. 
The prizes were decided to belong, first to 
the Browns, and second to the Yales. 

It was while the subject of the foul in this 
race was up for discussion among the judges, 
that a most unpleasant and objectionable 
side issue came up in the overcrowded 
judges’ boat, which for some minutes 
eclipsed the interest in the races, and called 
for the interposition of force to prevent a 
serious disturbance. A member of the 
Worcester general committee saw fit to 
criticise the assumption of the starter’s place 
by the gentleman who took it, something 
which gave no offence to any one else so lar 
as was known, and was necessitated by the 
absence of Mr. Elliott. Old scores were 
raked up and alluded to in a disagreeable 
way by one of the parties, and though the 
discussion subsided for a time, it began 
again very suddenly during the university 
race, when the most muscular of the two hit 
his opponent a blow in the face, which 
knocked him over the side against another 
boat, and nearly overturned the judges and 
a dozen or so of reporters in their boat. 
The affair was altogether to be regretted, 
and was repressed by the others at this 
point, though hard words were continued, 
and the face of one smarted and grew black 
from the stinging blow. 

THE UNIVERSITY RACE. 

The Freshman race concluded about half- 
past five, and the university crews were at 
once called up. During the afternoon a 
rather fresh east wind had pretty nearly 
subsided, and left the surface of the lake 
for much of the course as smooth as Captain 
Read could desire. At six o’clock the Har- 
vard university six came out for their work, 
and without much delay the Yales pushed 
out from their landing near by, and followed 
the crimson to the starting line. The Har- 
vards, with the exception of Lyman, wore 
white flannel shirts, and all had silk hand- 
kerchiefs of a rich crimson bound on their 
heads. The Yales were naked to the waist, 
and though the Harvards were enveloped in 
flannel, the muscular contrast was evident 
at a glance. Before the start, and while the 
Yales were getting into position, Harvard 
attempted a preliminary spurt, and went 
across the rope in a diagonal line towards 
the shore. One of the lazy sail-boats which 
were allowed to crowd the course and 
stupidly interfere with the progress of the 
races during the whole afternoon, happened 
to lie right in their way, and the shouted 
warning scarcely enabled them to lift their 
starboard oars, and swerve past the stupid 
impediment. They barely saved a smash- 
up by this adventure. Then they got back 
on the line, and both crews lying beyond it, 
slowly, almost imperceptibly, swung across, 
till the middle of the shells passed the line, 
when Blaikie suddenly gave the familiar 


8 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


send-off, and at ten minutes past six they 
were away. “As usual,” were the words 
with which Yale had greeted the announce- 
ment of its outside place, and as usual the 
Harvards went off quickest, and had the 
first advantage. It was a very small advan- 
tage though, and the Yales certainly won 
encomiums for the evenness of their stroke 
as they went up the course, pulling 43 
strokes per minute. But the Harvards were 
using the old splendid stroke, and 46 to the 
minute at that, and their lead grew to half a 
length before they were past the grand 
stand. A great burst of applause greeted 
the crews as they darted by, in which all 
cries were mingled, but beneath them all 
was heard a hoarse, low chant of “ ’rah, ’rah, 
’rah,” that sounded like a deep undertone of 
the sea. There was never a false or futile 
stroke by a Harvard oar, and the beau tv of 
their stroke was never shown to finer effect 
than as their oars alternately hovered on the 
surface, and dipped beneath it far up the mid- 
dle of the course. The Yale boat was a little 
higher in the water than the Harvard, and the 
Yale men pulled very much higher and with 
a far less skilful stroke. When they passed 
out of sight the Harvards were still less than 
a length ahead. They kept a beautifully 
straight course up the lake, pretty well out, 
Read showing that none of his skill had de- 
serted him. As they came within the view 
of the judges at the stake, a glance at the 
watch showed forty-two strokes, as regular 
as though pulled to the tick of a metronome. 
The Yales were not to be seen, being hidden 
behind a tliickly-wooded projection about 
three hundred yards from the stake. Every 
eye that could see it was anxiously scanning 
the extremity of this projection, when the 
Yales shot out as if from ambush, rowing 
forty-two slashing strokes a minute, ap- 
parently even with the crimson handker- 
chiefs. “ Now, Harvard ! Hit her up!” But 
Read had his keen weather-eye open, and 
Lyman promptly set forty-four strokes to the 
minute, which brought them to the stake 
with an oar’s length of clear water between 
their boat’s stern and the Yale’s bow. Read 
ran his boat very close to the stake — a little 
too close, as there was hardly three feet of 
water between his outriggers and the stake. 
The stern of the Harvard boat had hardly 
begun to swing around when the Yales’ bow 
glided into dangerous proximity to the Har- 
vards’ stern. “Phelps! Phelps! Hold all, 
or you’ll foul,” yelled the Yale judge; and 
just in time Phelps gave the order and 
avoided the accident. “ Put your oars under 
the stake buoy, port,” coolly ordered Read, 
seeing them drawing in to avoid grazing the 
stakes. Just then, through what appeared 
to be inexcusable carelessness, the Yales 
gave way, and the sharp prow of their boat 
was forced over the Harvard boat just in 
front of Lyman and almost into his lap, 


breaking off the wooden bar which sustains 
the rudder wires at that point, and rendering 
the rudder unmanageable and worse than 
useless. The frantic ejaculations of their 
judge called the Yales’ attention to the mis- 
chief, and they stopped, but as the Harvards 
made a wide turn in consequence of the dis- 
abled condition of their boat, they were en- 
abled to turn inside, and get off' almost as 
quickly as their rivals. Then Lyman had to 
adjust the rudder wires and broken cross 
piece to prevent their dragging in the wa- 
ter, and though he let out forty-four strokes 
to the minute, and was nobly supported, the 
boat’s speed was too much impaired to com- 
pete with Yale. The latter crew soon gained the 
lead with forty-two strokes a minute, followed 
by Walter Brown, who indulged in such buf- 
foonery as to increase, if possible, the dis- 
gust he had already excited. Watching the 
course with anxious scrutiny from the judges’ 
boat, one boat was seen well out in the 
middle course, while the most careful exam- 
ination of the vicinity through a powerful 
glass failed to reveal a competitor. As the 
boat approached, wonder turned to astonish- 
ment when the coming boat was found to be 
Yale, and Harvard was nowhere to be seen. 
The result has been forecast. The Yale 
came in in iS minutes, 45 seconds, and sev- 
eral minutes afterward the Harvards came 
around the eastern point and pulled slowly 
down past the grand stand, and as they came 
to the judges’ boat Lyman held up the dis- 
abled tiller wires, and the explanation of 
their position was seen at a glance. 

The result of the University race, and the 
almost promiscuous fouling in the Freshman 
race, produced a general feeling of intense 
dissatisfaction. An accident was hardly ex- 
pected even among the freshmen, while the 
foul in the University race was a painful sur- 
prise. There was no question as to the foul, 
but the Yale judge, at the starting-place, 
raised the extraordinary — and, it might be 
said, absurd — point that it was purely acci- 
dental, and therefor not punishable. At a 
hearing in the evening, the same judge 
claimed that the Yales were crowded in 
shore before the turn. The decision was in 
favor of Harvard, but the Yales refused to 
accept it, and challenged the Harvards to 
row to-morrow or next week. This chal- 
lange was declined, because the Harvard 
men had broken training, and some have 
made engagements to travel with their 
families. 

The stake judge for Harvard was George 
II. Gould, ’72, and for Yale, George A. 
Adee, ’67. 

We are indebted to the Associated Press 
for the surprising information by telegraph 
that “ the four-oared race has not been de- 
cided yet, owing to a foul claimed by the 
Freshmen.” — [William M. Olin. 


The Worcester Races of 1870. 


9 


[From the Worcester Gazette, July 23.] 

THE DECISION OF THE REFEREE. 

The announcement at the Lake, that the 
decision of the fouls claimed in the last three 
races would be decided at the Bay State 
House in the evening, attracted large num- 
bers of interested parties, and the spacious 
hall of that hotel was packed full of collegians 
for more than three hours. Notwithstand- 
ing the excitement naturally attendant upon 
the questions being investigated by the judg- 
es up stairs, the utmost good feeling appeared 
to exist among the men from the several col- 
leges, and all united in lustily singing Col- 
lege songs, while waiting the decision of the 
referee. 

The hearing of the evidence concerning the 
foul claimed by Harvard in the University 
race occupied the attention of the referee, 
Mr. Edwin Brown, from nine till ten o’clock, 
and the testimony of the judges at the upper 
stake, and members of the two crews were 
patiently heard and carefully considered. It 
appeared that the Harvard boat reached the 
upper stake first, and as they began turning 
there was clear water between them and 
Yale. Harvard made a very short turn and 
Yale came on with great speed and began 
turning outside of Harvard, but so near as to 
run into the Harvards, tearing away their 
port steering wire and bending the rudder 
yoke, rendering the rudder entirely useless. 

It was claimed for Yale that the foul was 
entirely accidental, and should not prejudice 
their cause, but Mr. Brown decided against 
them and gave the race to Harvard. Yale 
thereupon withdrew, refusing to accept the 
decision, and subsequently sent the follow- 
ing challenge to the Harvard crew : — 

Bay State House, Worcester, J uly 22, ’70. 

To the Captain of the University Crew of 

Harvard : 

By, as we believe, an unjust decision, the 
race pulled to-day has been decided against 
us. We challenge the Harvard crew to pull 
over the same course and under the same 
rules as those that governed the race to-day, 
on Saturday next, or any day next week. 

D. McC. Bone. 

The Harvard crew, having broken their 
training and one of their number being on 
the eve of departure for the West, declined 
to accept the challenge. 

Yale claimed that Harvard veered from a 
direct course on the way up the lake and 
crowded her in towards the shore, and ex- 
pressed a wish to introduce testimony to that 
effect. Mr. Brown declined to hear anything 
on that claim, holding that it would have no 
bearing on the result of the race since the 
boats did not come in contact at all. The 
claim was not made until last evening. Mr. 
Brown is not a graduate of either Harvard or 
Yale and there can be no doubt that he was 
strictly impartial in his decision. 

It may as well be acknowledged that the 


regatta, yesterday, taken as a whole, was a 
lamentable failure. Through no fault of the 
citizens’ committee of arrangements, and 
hardly of the crews, but rather by reason of 
a series of untoward accidents, which we are 
sure both sides regret, the interest was in a 
great measure destroyed. The wherry race 
alone was pulled through to the end, without 
a mishap ; in the second race there was a col- 
lision of boats ; in the Freshman race there 
were two claims of “foul,” and the Univer- 
sity race was cut short in the middle, the 
Harvard being disabled by a thrust from the 
sharp bow of the Yale. We have no dispo- 
sition to detract from the credit of the crews, 
to which the colors have been, or may be, 
awarded, but the result was unquestionably 
disappointing, and especially in the final race, 
to the older graduates of both colleges and 
to the spectators at large. We speak of it 
simply as a misfortune. 

Undoubtedly every Harvard under-gradu- 
ate feels absolutely sure that the Harvard, if 
let alone, would have beaten easily. No 
Yale man, on the other hand, has the slight- 
est doubt but that the blue would have over- 
hauled the red on the way down. We do 
not propose to express any opinion on the 
now doubtful point, on which disinterested 
spectators are also at odds, but we think this 
refusal of the Harvard men to row again was 
justifiable. Leaving out of the question the 
facts that they had broken their training and 
that one of the six was compelled to depart 
for the West — circumstances that may be 
counted only as excuses by their opponents 
— the race was undoubtedly theirs by the 
decision of the referee. If the course was 
shortened from three miles to a mile and a 
half, it was the fault of the Yales. As a man 
can only be tried once for his life, so we sup- 
pose undergraduates think the honor of the 
college is not to be risked a second time, 
when no necessity compels it. Nevertheless, 
to win the flags under such circumstances, is 
not satisfactory, when compared with other 
victories of Harvard. 

At the same time, there is no occasion to 
mourn over or talk much about what cannot 
be helped. Any little feeling which may 
have been raised between the colleges by the 
discussion of last evening was only skin 
deep, and will melt away long before the end 
of the vacation ; — the breezes of the moun- 
tain and the sea shore will soon blow all 
thoughts of the contest out of these young 
heads. Another summer will tell a story of 
| its own. The history of the Cambridge and 
Oxford races in England shows what can be 
done by perseverance. 


[Special Cor. N. Y. Evening Post, July 20.] 
BEFORE THE FRESHMAN RACE. 

It is very probable that two stake-boats 
will be used on this occasion to obviate the 
vexatious waiting to which the outside boat 
must submit which gets to the turn exactly 


io 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing, 


or nearly level with the inside one. This 
will be agreeable for the two University 
boats, but absolutely indispensable for the 
four Freshman crews, in case they row. I 
say, in case, for a cloud much bigger than a 
man’s hand seems to lower over this part of 
the race. 

The original challenge was from the Yale 
Freshmen to the Harvards ; it was accepted, 
and Friday, the 22d, and the Worcester 
course, fixed as the date and place. Later 
came challenges from Brown and Amherst 
to Harvard, which the Harvards, very inno- 
cently supposing that their Worcester race 
might be considered a “free fight,” also ap- 
pointed for the present occasion. But in the 
meantime similar challenges from Brown and 
Amherst to Yale were accepted, and Monday, 
the 25th, fixed by Yale for the occasion. 
They supposed the country colleges under- 
stood and accepted this condition, and were 
greatly disconcerted on arriving in Worces- 
ter to find them here and prepared to pull the 
Yale — together with the Harvards — on Fri- 
day, the 22d. 

To this they stoutly object, less from any 
informality in their manner of getting into 
the race, than from the simple fact that the 
upper end of the lake at the turning, is very 
narrow and plainly insufficient, they say, for 
four boats, without the greatest risks of vex- 
atious “ fouls.” The country crews, on the 
other hand, are unwilling to wait till Mon- 
day, and no doubt have, or think they have, 
good ground for insisting on coming into the 
Friday race, though from the late hour at 
which the matter came to my notice, I was 
unable to hear their side of the story. 

I will not promise that 1 have given you a 
perfectly correct account of this tangled and 
annoying little misunderstanding ; but mis- 
understanding it undoubtedly is, and I can- 
not but hope that the matter will be pleas- 
antly settled by Friday, and the lake be 
found broad enough for all four crews. C. 


[From N. Y. Evening Post, July 28.] 

SOME CORRECTIONS. 

To the Editors of the Evening Post : — Those 
who take their impressions of the late col- 
lege race from the accounts of some of the 
New York press, can hardly help concluding 
that the scene at the stake boat must have 
been a mixture of accident and bad rowing 
on the part of the Harvard, as well as the 
Yale boat; that the decision of the referee 
was mistaken, and that the Harvards took an 
unkind or pusillanimous advantage of it, in 
refusing to try again on Monday, in response 
to the Yale challenge. One of the Harvard 
crew, perfectly cognizant of all that occurred, 
begs me to state through your columns pre- 
cisely what did happen — which I do the more 
willingly, as it has already fallen in my way 
as your correspondent, to send you one letter ! 
on the regatta. 


The Harvard boat was, on reaching the 
stake, inside and slightly ahead ; making the 
turn she was entirely, in boating phrase, “ in 
her own water,” and had, according to row- 
ing laws, the right of first turn. She did not 
in any sense strike the stake. My informant 
assures me that his was the only oar which 
touched, and that only a slight graze. The 
Yale boat pressing eagerly for a close turn 
also, was only prevented at first from cutting 
into the Flarvard’s quarter by a warning from 
the stake judge, and “ held all,” or stopped 
rowing. As Harvard was finishing her turn, 
and just as Reed was about to give the order 
“ Give way, port !” which would have set her 
in the straight course down the lake, Yale, in 
her haste, “ gave way ” again, and came in on 
the Harvard quarter, running almost into 
Lyman’s lap, smashing the washer or pro- 
tecting rim which surrounds the rowers’ seats 
and hopelessly damaging the tiller wires. 
As the Yale bow slipped off by the going 
ahead of Harvard, it dragged and entangled 
the wires, so that the Harvard rudder was 
jammed a-starboard and their port oars were 
rendered comparatively useless. The slight- 
est knowledge of rowing shows that in such 
a case fast pulling becomes an impossibility, 
much of the starboard pulling going to neu- 
tralize the tendency to that side given by the 
hampered rudder. Though if the accident 
had fortunately carried the rudder clear away 
and rid them of it entirely, the Harvards 
would have been only too glad to pull the 
race through, steering in the old fashion by 
the bow-oar. 

The referee, after a careful hearing, and 
after solemnly appealing to both captains as 
to their full and free choice of him as medi- 
ator, decided for Harvard, on which Yale 
immediately handed in a note containing a 
challenge for Monday, in the phraseology of 
which occurred the statement that the chal- 
lenge was given on the ground of unfair 
ruling, as they viewed it, on the part of the 
referee. Here came the main hitch in the 
question of accepting. The talk about 
“breaking training,” etc., was nonsense. 
Mr. Lyman, it is true, had made arrange- 
ments to join his family, and in fact left that 
evening, but the main difficulty in accepting 
the Yale challenge lay simply in the fact 
that, by so accepting, the Harvards would 
not only have confessed themselves in the 
wrong, which they in all honor and conscience 
didn’t believe, but would in addition have by 
the very terms of the Yale note, inflicted a 
severe “ snub ” on the Worcester gentleman 
acting as referee, in whose discretion and 
fairness they had full confidence, and who 
had accepted the post at their own request. 
As gentlemen, therefore, aside from any 
vanity as oarsmen, they had no alternative 
but to refuse. 

It will be very unfortunate if the discus- 
sions arising from this and similar mishaps 
should lower our confidence in the plucky 
young fellows who row, or our interest in the 


The Worcester Races of 1870 . 




noble sport to which they devote themselves ; 
but it is greatly to be hoped that they may 
awaken the boating community to the neces- 
sity of either abolishing the turn altogether, 
and rowing over a straight, unbroken course, 
as in England, or choosing such open water 
as will allow a stake boat for every crew. 
The present rule causes great inconvenience, 
and in some cases essential injustice to one 
or both of the contestants. C. 


[From the N. Y. Evening Post, Au#. 5.] 

REPLY OF W. W. SCRANTON, YALE’S ROW OAR 

IN ’64-5. 

To the Editors of the Evening Post : — 

My attention has just been called to a com- 
munication in your issue of July 28, entitled 
“The Harvard and Yale Boat Race,” with 
the request, as I was in the referee’s room 
during the entire time testimony was taken 
on both University and Freshman races, that 
I would send you a statement of the Yale 
case. 

“C” thinks we had no right to stigmatize 
the referee’s decision as unjust. Let us see. 
We claimed that, before the boats reached 
the stake, where the alleged foul took place, 
Harvard had crowded us out of our course. 
If we could sustain this charge, Harvard, by 
the rules of boat-racing everywhere, would be 
ruled out of the race. Certainly, whether we 
could sustain the charge or not, we had the 
right to make it, and, in common decency, to 
be heard upon it. But the referee at once 
refused decisively to take any testimony 
whatever on the subject, saying he would 
permit no such point to be made ! We 
handed him the printed regatta rules, in 
which it was distinctly stated that, if an 
inside boat jockeyed an outside, she should 
be ruled out from that moment. He replied : 
“ These rules are for Worcester boats, and 
don’t apply to the college races.” We said: 
“This is the universal rule of boat-racing in 
America and England.” “Gentlemen,” said 
the referee, “ the inside boat has the right of 
the course and can go where she likes.” We 
said : “ If that is so, then she can drive the 
outside boat ashore.” To which the referee 
gave this squelcher: “Gentlemen, I believe 
that I am the referee, and that my decision 
ends the matter. I decline to hear this point 
discussed, or to take any testimony upon it.” 
And so shut us up and gave the race to 
Harvard. 

Very well. Now, Mr. Editor, observe how 
this judge, whose decisions we are called 
upon to admire, ignores his own principles 
of five minutes previous, when, by his adher- 
ing to it, Yale would be advantaged. In the 
Freshman race, Amherst had the inside, then 
Brown, Yale and Harvard. Going up the 


I I 

lake, Amherst (which has the inside, mind 
you, and therefore, according to the referee’s 
statement not ten minutes before, has the 
right of the course, and, according to the 
referee, can row all over the lake, if she 
likes) appears, according to the testimony, 
to swerve a little to her right, whereupon 
Brown runs into her, and damages her so as 
virtually to throw her out of the rest of the 
race. Now, according to the referee’s 
principle laid down in the University race, 
if ever there was a dead foul this was one. 
To declare it so, however, would give the 
race to Yale, who came in second. He 
therefore decides that Brown did not foul 
Amherst, and gave the race to Brown. He 
also took testimony as to Yale’s having 
crowded Harvard in this race, the very thing 
he had refused to do in the University deci- 
sion. 

Mr. Editor, we trust we may be excused 
if, not quite seeing the justice of this sort of 
thing, and firmly believing that we had not 
had a fair show, we took the liberty of right- 
ing ourselves as best we could by challeng- 
ing Harvard to row the race again the next 
day, or as soon after as possible. Harvard 
declined on the ground that Mr. Lyman 
reallv must go to Chicago. Something was 
also said about having broking training, &c. 
We thought these excuses rather thin, and 
said so, and were privately denounced as 
“no gentleman” for so doing. 1 am glad to 
see in the communication signed “ C ” 
authorized, as the writer says, by one of the 
Harvard crew, that these excuses were, as 
we said at the time, only miserable pretexts. 
Having found that those would not hold 
water, “ C” now says Harvard didn’t accept 
our challenge because she didn’t want to 
“ snub ” the referee ! 

I hope we shall be pardoned if we are a 
little skeptical as to this pretext also. The 
long and short of the matter is (and the pub- 
lic has about settled down to that opinion) 
Harvard didn’t accept our challenge because 
she understood her interest and didn’t like 
to risk it. 

Whether Harvard’s condescending to 
accept the flags, won in a manner worthy of 
professionals, in a race pulled professedly in 
pure love of honor, and refusing our chal- 
lenge under such circumstances, will tend 
to raise or lower public opinion of college 
racing, would not seem difficult to conjec- 
ture. Harvard is quite welcome to all the 
glory she has got or can get from it. 

In 1865, after winning the first day, Yale 
had no intention of entering the city races 
the day after, until it was intimated that 
Harvard, while satisfied with the results of 
the first day, still wished to retrieve herself if 
she could. Yale then, risking the chance of 
losing all she had won the da}' before, cheer- 
fully gratified Harvard by rowing again. 
Yale now has no reason to be ashamed of 
the contrast. X. 

August 2, 1870. 


12 


Yale and Harvard Boat -Racing. 


[From the N. Y. Nation, July 28.] 

Numerous mishaps attended the racing 
between the colleges at Worcester last 
Friday, and the only thoroughly pleasing 
thing to an outsider was the victory of the 
Brown University Freshman crew, who beat 
the Harvard and Yale handsomely, and 
were begrudged their unwonted honors by 
nobody. An Amherst Freshman crew, too, 
put in an appearance, and it seems clear 
that the Oxford and Harvard race of last 
year has produced an impression favorable 
to boating on the undergraduate mind. The 
Yale and Harvard University Crews were 
the victims of a “foul,” of which the report- 
ers of the various papers give conflicting 
accounts. The fact is, there ought to be 
nothing said about such a matter after the 
judges have once heard evidence and de- 
cided. “ Pay up, and shut up,” is the only 
good line for a sportsman to take when his 
freely elected umpires have declared results. 
And as for the newspaper men, they have no 
business to be partisan, and should talk 
either of what they have seen with their own 
eyes or in accordance with what the referee 
and judges have decided. No good comes 
to anybody, however, by an agitation of the 
pros and cons, and calling names. 


[From the New Haven Journal and Courier, July 26th.] 

The opinion, judged by the newspaper ar- 
ticles, is pretty unanimous to the effect that 
Yale was cheated out of the prizes given in 
the University race. It appears that the 
Harvard men in their desperate pulling up 
the lake, finding the race against them, ran 
their boat upon the stake boat, and forcing 
the Yale boat into the same disaster, claimed 
the foul that secured for them, through the 
partiality of the referee in sympathy with 
them, the prize they had failed to win. Yale 
should hereafter refuse to row at Worcester 
and be sharp enough to secure an unpreju- 
diced man for referee. 


[From the Providence Journal, July 26.] 

A STRAIGHT COURSE WANTED. 

To the Editor of the Journal : — 

The late regatta at Worcester, whatever 
may be said of the decisions, has clearly 


demonstrated one thing. Those who saw the 
race and have examined the testimony can- 
not but be struck with the difficulties and 
dangers attendant upon turning the stake- 
boat. Is it reasonable to suppose that two 
rival crews in long shells, when almost side 
by side and each desirous of making the 
shortest possible turn, can avoid fouling ? If 
we are to assume one crew to be so much 
ahead at that point as to avoid the danger of 
collision, we beg the whole question of the 
relative superiority of the crews, for the pur- 
pose of testing which the contest is held. 

None but a straight-away race can ever 
prove perfectly satisfactory. True, there are 
some objections. The spectators cannot see 
both the start and the coming in ; and it may 
be said that the danger of fouling is not en- 
tirely removed. But the disadvantage to the 
spectator is more than compensated if the 
result can be made sure and indisputable ; 
and the danger of collision is certainly re- 
duced to a minimum. Umpires and judges 
are very well and very necessary, but we 
want our races decided on the spot, that the 
spectators may be the jury, and that their 
verdict may be unanimous. 

The late regatta decisions were justified by 
the testimony, and we believe that Harvard 
and Brown were rightly adjudged the winners 
in the University and Freshman races. But 
no one who was present can say that those 
decisions, particularly that in the University 
race, were satisfactory to all parties. College 
regattas were intended to cultivate good 
feeling and generous emulation between the 
rival institutions, and when suspicion and 
hostility take their places, it is certainly time 
to look for the cause and the remedy. Many 
reasons induce the belief that Worcester 
will not be the scene of the next regatta. 
Lake Ouinsigamond, with all its advantages, 
is not suitable for a straight race, and we 
trust that none other will be rowed. Provi- 
dence has been suggested, and a better place 
can hardly be found. The Seekonk river 
fulfills all the requirements of a fair course, 
and the situation of the city in this State 
would make it still more acceptable. The 
want of commodious hotels is a serious 
drawback, but we have no doubt that even 
this difficulty will soon be obviated by the 
many public-spirited citizens of Providence. 

Harvard. 


The Advocate-Courant Controversy. 


13 


THE ADVOCATE-COURANT CONTROVERSY. 


• • • 


[From the Harvard Advocate, Oct. 14, 1870.1 
EDITORIAL. 

We welcome back, this year, five of our 
ill-treated, but gallant and victorious crew. 
We trust that, another year, a more gentle- 
manly spirit may be shown by those who 
should be our friendly rivals. 

BOATING. 

Were it not that so many articles on the 
races have appeared in New York and other 
papers, which completely misrepresent the 
whole affair, and place Harvard and her 
crew in a very false position, it would almost 
seem better that the usual account in the 
Advocate should give place to more inviting 
matter ; so unsatisfactory to all was the day, 
and so productive of ill-feeling is the sub- 
ject. 

THE FRESHMAN RACE. 

In this there was very little excitement for 
Harvard men. Amherst led about one-third 
of the way up the course, when Brown 
passed her, and kept ahead easily the rest of 
the race, crossing the line in 19 m. 45 sec. 
Amherst claimed, after the race, that Brown 
fouled her as she passed ; this claim was not 
granted by the judges. As Harvard and 
Yale, who paired off and rowed up the 
course together, approached the Point on 
the right bank, Yale, having the outside, 
pressed Harvard so close to the shore that 
their oars overlapped, and one of the Yale 
oars struck a Harvard Freshman in the back. 
The Harvard crew stopped till the Yale 
passed out of their way ; and as they were 
drawing up on them, they were again forced 
so near the shore that the copper was torn 
off from one of the Harvard oars by the 
shore. Their claim of foul was not granted, 
and Yale came in second. It seems but just 
to state that the crews had agreed, since 
there were four crews to row, that no coach- 
ing should be allowed ; in spite of this, 
Yale’s trainer was on the course, coaching 
his crew. Y et the Harvard crew were spoken 
of as “jockeys,” by a New Haven paper, 
after the race. 

THE UNIVERSITY RACE. 

At last the time came for the great 
event of the day, for which every one was 
waiting, and from which every one expected 
so much excitement and pleasure. Alas, to 
what disappointment were they doomed ! 

At about six o’clock, the Harvard crew 
shot out from under the bridge. Enthusias- 
tic cheers greeted them from the Grand 
Stand. They pulled directly to the line, and 
took their position next to the judge’s boat. 


After a tedious delay, the Yale crew followed 
and took their place. Previous to the start, 
it had been agreed upon between the cap- 
tains of the two crews and Mr. Elliott, the 
starter, that there should be an interval of 
four or five seconds between the warning 
“Are you ready?” and the final “ Go !” and that 
both crews should wait for the “Go.” Con- 
trary to this agreement, Mr. Elliott made no 
interval between the warning and the “ Go.” 
The Harvards waited for the “Go,” and were 
not expecting it as soon as it came; while 
the Yale crew quietly slipped away on the 
“ you ” in “ Are you ready? ” This certainly 
looked like an understood thing. Notwith- 
standing this advantage gained by Yale 
at the start, Harvard led considerably as 
they passed the Point, and slowly but steadi- 
ly drew ahead. They kept a beautifully 
straight course up the lake, pretty well out. 
As the crews approached the stake, Harvard 
was leading by at least two lengths, and had 
any trouble there been anticipated they un- 
doubtedly would have been considerably 
further in advance ; but inasmuch as they 
had the inside track, it was their policy not 
to do their very best until they had turned. 
Read ran his boat very close to the buoy, — 
a little too close, — but as the men on the 
port-side quickly slipped their oars under 
the float in accordance with his orders, he 
was in a fair way to make successfully one 
of the shortest turns on record. But as soon 
as the Harvards began to turn, the Yales 
overlapped them, and were only prevented 
from running them down by the cries of 
warning from the stake-boat. They stopped 
a moment, looked round, and then gave 
way again ; thus forcing their bow complete- 
ly over the after part of the Harvard, just in 
front of Lyman and almost into his lap. The 
rudder-wires were torn away, the yoke bent 
up, and the top of the rudder split off, ren- 
dering that necessary article entirely useless. 
This was all done in the face of fair and re- 
peated warnings from the judges in the 
stake-boat, as well as from the Harvard 
stroke. Of course, after this, the Harvard 
was practically out of the race ; for with the 
rudder jammed, and the yoke dragging on the 
starboard side, it was impossible to have 
any control over its course, as could plainly 
be seen from the Point when the crew finally 
pulled leisurely down. Yale kept on, and 
crossed the line in 18 m. 45 sec. Harvard 
followed slowly, and crossed in 20 m. 30 sec., 
after having been continually taunted and 
insulted on her way down by a man with 
whom it is to be regretted Yale has had so 
much to do. The Harvard crew immediate- 
ly claimed the race; and as they supposed 


14 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


they were rowing with gentlemen, expected 
it would at once be given to them in accord- 
ance with the universal rules of boat-racing. 
The referee refused to give his decision until 
the arrival of the judges and referee from the 
stake. When these gentlemen arrived and 
were questioned concerning the foul, they all 
(including the Yale judge) answered uncon- 
ditionally that the foul was wholly on the 
part of Yale. But Mr. Clark, judge of the 
line, was not satisfied, and expressed his de- 
termination to have the decision deferred till 
evening. The referee, seeing that it was a 
plain case, was desirous of giving his de- 
cision on the spot : but still Mr. Clark and 
the Yale men protested. They raised the ex- 
traordinary and before unheard of point of 
“accidental foul.” They claimed that if the 
Yale crew didn’t mean to run into the Har- 
vard, no matter how much they damaged 
her, they could not be held responsible ! 
The most uninitiated can see how uncertain 
all races would be under such regulations, 
and how difficult would be the judges’ duty. 
The persistence of the Yale men at last in- 
duced Mr. Brown, the referee, to give them 
a formal hearing at the Bay State that even- 
ing. At nearly eleven o’clock, after a long 
and patient hearing of all parties, and when 
the Yale men had been listened to for a long 
time after it was plain that they were simply 
trying to talk against time, the referee de- 
cided that by all rules of boat-racing the 
race had been fairly won by Harvard, and 
therefore awarded to her crew the Flags. It 
is needless to go into the particulars of the 
hearing ; suffice it to say that every charge 
brought forward by the Yale crew was com- 
pletely overthrown by the testimony of their 
own side, and that throughout the hearing 
the Yale men acted in a manner which we 
sincerely hope no Harvard man will ever be 
guilty of. The Yales refused to accept the 
decision of Mr. Brown, a gentleman whom 
both crews had chosen to settle all ques- 
tions ; and in a challenge, casting severe re- 
flections on the integrity of that gentleman, 
they offered to row the race again. This 
challenge was declined, because it was im- 
possible for the Harvards to accept it with- 
out acknowledging that the foul had oc- 
curred through their fault ; that the race had 
been unjustly awarded to them, and that 
they were altogether in the wrong ; while 
the Yales were wholly in the right, and were 
the injured parties. No one who saw the j 
Harvards steadily drawing ahead up the 
whole course, and who knew from past ex- 
perience their pluck and endurance and 
Read’s short turns, could doubt for a mo- 
ment the result of the race, provided fair 
play was insured them. No one could re- 
gret the unsatisfactory termination of the 
race more than the members of the Harvard 
crew themselves. They had given up more 
than a month of their vacation to row this 
race, and would gladly have waited longer 
if they could have been sure of a fair con- 


test ; but when they receive from any one 
such ungentlemanly treatment as they re- 
ceived at the hands of the Yale men, they 
think that the less they have to do with them 
the better. Harvard has always given way 
to Yale in the time of the race, in not making 
it a university race as she wished, and in 
every point of difference that has occurred ; 
it seems no more than fair that she should 
be met half-way, at least, in so small a thing 
as common courtesy. 

We cannot speak for future Harvard 
crews ; but we can say that the members of 
the crew of 1870 assert that they will never 
row another race with Yale until she will in- 
sure them a fair race, and a course free from 
all such men as the one who figured so 
prominently in July last under the patron- 
age of Yale colors. 

what’s to be done? 

Another July has seen Harvard again vic- 
torious at the oar, but victorious in such a 
way that there is little real satisfaction in it. 

The contest, instead of having been one of 
honest rivalry between the two colleges, and 
a fair trial of the muscle and pluck of each, 
has been degraded to lower ground by the 
use of professional tricks. 

It is unnecessary to tell here the story of 
the race and foul. No amount of talking or 
writing can change the facts ; these are past 
things, beyond our control ; what we should 
try to do, is to find some means by which a 
recurrence of such disgraceful scenes maybe 
prevented. 

As long as the Yale men continue to make 
use of a professional trainer, they will prob- 
ably be taught the use of professional tricks ; 
and as long as the race course is open to all 
who have the impudence to place themselves 
there, in spite of any protest or remonstrance, 
just so long must we be liable to a repetition 
of the insults of this year. 

It is not just that our men should be called 
upon to undergo a hard year’s work and se- 
vere training, only to have their labor re- 
warded by foul play. They wish to have an 
honest trial, to decide which are the best 
men, and if the trial cannot be fairly carried 
out, they do not wish to try at all ; further- 
more, they go to Worcester expecting to 
meet gentlemen, and be treated like gentle- 
men ; not, when they have been crippled by 
their opponents, to be subjected to the taunts 
of a hireling of Yale. 

We have always given up to Yale’s con- 
venience, ever since our term has ended be- 
fore theirs, by having our men stay here at 
work long after the vacation has begun. 
And this year when the patience of our men 
had been more severely tried than usual, and 
they were willing to give up a month of their 
own time to hard work, they were rewarded, 
first, by being run down by their opponents 
on the water, and afterwards by being run 
down in abusive articles in the New York 


The Advocate-Courant Controversy . 


15 


papers. Harvard men should have more 
self-respect than tamely to submit to such 
indignities ; they should expect gentlemanly 
conduct on the part of their rivals, and refuse 
to row them, until they can be assured that 
the acts of this year shall not be repeated. 

For myself, I cannot see any way which 
would be effectual, except to refuse to row 
Yale, unless she agrees to give up the use of 
a professional trainer, and to unite with us 
in making rules for the government of the 
course, which will insure to both parties 
freedom from outside interference, and to 
which all the colleges concerned shall agree 
to conform strictly. T. H. 

[From the College Courant, Oct. 29.] 

WORCESTER, ONCE MORE. 

“ We welcome back, this year, five of our 
ill-treated, but gallant and victorious crew, 
and trust that, another year, a more gentle- 
manly spirit may be shown by those who 
should be our friendly rivals.” So says the 
Harvard Advocate of October 14 ; and as 
sworn admirers of genius, we are bound to 
doff our hats before the sublime, measure- 
less, unspeakable injustice of its words. As 
friends of truth, on the other hand, we are 
bound to state once more to the world the 
facts upon which these words are based. 

Five years ago, — when Harvard jealousy 
attempted to dim the glory of Yale victory 
by adding one full minute to the times of 
each crew as they were officially announced 
by time-keepers, judges and referee, — Yale, 
after one or two rejoinders in proof of a fact 
as indisputable as that the sun rises in the 
east, made no further attempt to refute the 
contemptible slander. The result was that 
Harvard has never lost an opportunity to 
push and proclaim it everywhere, until not 
only has it come to be honestly accepted as 
gospel-truth by the generation which has 
since grown up at that college, but even the 
present Yale undergraduates have fallen into 
a way of looking upon “Wilbur Bacon’s time” 
as a thing, after all, rather doubtful, if not 
altogether a myth. This experience we do 
not care to have repeated ; and so, since 
Harvard, emboldened by its former success, 
seems disposed to attempt a repetition of its 
tactics of 1865 (in that having brought dis- 
grace upon the name of college-boating and 
of Yale, by its outrageous conduct at Wor- 
cester last July, it now attempts to shift the 
odium of it upon the very men whom it 
abused), no other course is left for us than to 


depart from the traditional Yale policy of 
silence, which has brought so poor a return, 
and to give back word for word. It is three 
months since the races were rowed ; and we 
should be willing to leave the public alone 
with its opinions, as they were formed when 
the matter was fresh, and both sides had 
stated their case. But the Advocate has de- 
creed otherwise ; and its insulting words — 
all the more censurable because coming from 
a journal which stands at the very head of 
the American college press — must be replied 
to. 

First, in the matter of the Freshman race: 
It was in the month of June that the Yale ’73 
boat-club sent a challenge to the correspond- 
ing club of Harvard to row a six-oared race, 
at Worcester, on the 22d of July, under the 
usual rules, for the Freshman championship 
between the two colleges. This challenge 
the Harvard ’73 duly accepted ; and both 
crews fell to work to prepare themselves for 
the race. Meanwhile the Freshman crews of 
Amherst and Brown send in challenges to 
their Yale and Harvard brethren, asking to 
be allowed a chance to share in the contest 
between them. To this Harvard consents, 
but Yale says, “No. We aim to take the 
Freshman flag from Harvard only. This de- 
cided, we will agree to row an independent 
race with you.” With this understanding, 
Yale’s Freshman six went up to Worcester. 
Here the Brown captain first met them, and 
urged them to reconsider their decision, say- 
ing that the Amherst crew were even more 
anxious for such reconsideration than them- 
selves, that the Harvard crew also desired it, 
and that the “general sentiment of the Wor- 
cester people ” was unanimously in favor of 
a single trial between the four crews. Still, 
he admitted that the Brown men would be 
willing to row in a separate race with Yale, if 
the point were insisted upon. But when the 
Amherst captain appeared, it was plain that 
his crew and college would think the time 
and money spent in making preparations 
almost thrown away were they not allowed to 
enter into the Yale-and-Harvard race. The 
idea even was advanced that as Harvard had 
won the Freshman race (’72) of the year 
before, the outside colleges understood its 
present representatives (’73) to have entire 
control of the matter, even allowing them to 
participate in spite of Yale’s veto. The Yale 


i6 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


crew held firm to their first agreement, how- 
ever, until the very day before the race, when 
they had an interview with their Harvard 
rivals, to perfect the final arrangements. 
Here Harvard showed its fine sense of honor, 
by refusing in so many words to row the race 
it had agreed to row, unless Yale would also 
allow the two outside colleges to enter it. 
Yale being thus pressed to the wall, — and 
seeing that its further refusal would at once 
be used to place it before the public in a false 
light, as the breaker-up of the race, the de- 
spiser of small colleges, and so forth, — at 
last gave its angry consent to the innovation. 
Then the arrangements were decided upon, 
and of course in making them Harvard had 
its own way in everything, since the other 
two colleges naturally sided with the one 
which had befriended them ; and so Yale was 
thenceforth at their mercy. It wanted two 
stakes (a thing desirable even were there 
only two crews in the contest), but Harvard 
said, No, the four boats must all turn about 
a single stake ; and so on for the rest of 
Yale’s suggestions. In this pleasant frame 
of mind the four crews entered upon the 
race. 

The result is well known : Amherst and 
Brown started up the left side of the lake 
together, Yale and Harvard the right side ; 
Amherst being nearest the left shore, Har- 
vard nearest the right. At a distance of per- 
haps a mile from the start, the Amherst boat 
veered to the right and was fouled and dis- 
abled by the Brown, which proceeded on its 
way to the stake, just as the Yale was making 
a long turn around it, with the Harvard close 
behind. Brown, by making a skilful short 
turn inside of Yale, then got the start, and 
came in first, in 19 m. 21 s., closely followed 
by Yale in 19 m. 45 s., afterwards by Harvard 
in 20 m., and finally by the disabled Amherst 
boat, whose time was not taken. On reach- 
ing the judges’ boat, Yale at once put in the 
claim of a foul against Harvard, to which 
Harvard shortly afterwards added the claim 
of a foul against Yale, which latter claim was 
disallowed by the judges. The Advocate as- 
serts that when the boats came together one 
of the Harvard crew was struck in the back 
by a Yale oar; and the assertion may be a 
true one ; but it is certainly a fact that the : 
Yale stroke-oarsman was given a blow in the 
leg by a Harvard oar, whose mark he carried 


for a fortnight or more ; and that this was 
done in obedience to the plainly-heard or- 
der of the Harvard captain, “ Strike ’em ! 
sink ’em if you can !” As for Amherst’s 
claim of foul against Brown, it was disal- 
lowed under the rule forbidding one boat to 
cross the straight course of another. Had it 
been granted, Yale, which came in second, 
would have received the flag. The conduct 
of Harvard in this matter is susceptible of 
but one explanation : a determined resolution 
that, come what would, Yale should not have 
the Hag. Knowing itself to be the poorest 
crew upon the lake, and believing that, — if it 
rowed the race it promised to, — it would al- 
most certainly be defeated, Harvard insisted 
upon having the outside colleges take part, 
not only because of the chance that one or 
the other of them might fairly vanquish Yale, 
but also for the opportunity thus afforded for 
jockeying and favoritism in the decision of 
the fouls which were almost certain to hap- 
pen if four boats attempted to turn about 
a single stake. The Advocate says that, “for 
Harvard men, there was very little excite- 
ment in the Freshman race.” Exactly. 

And now, the University race : “The Har- 
vard crew have the inside. After a tedious 
delay the Yale crew follow and take their 
place. Previous to the start,” thus the Har- 
vard Advocate , “it had been agreed upon by 
the captains of the two crews and Mr. Elliott, 
the starter, that there should be an interval 
of five seconds between the warning, ‘ Are 
you ready?’ and the final 1 Go !’ and that both 
crews should wait for the ‘ Go !’ Contrary to 
this agreement, Mr. Elliott made no interval 
between the warning and the ‘ Go.’ The 
Harvards waited for the ‘Go’ and were not 
expecting it as soon as it came ; while the 
Yale crew quietly slipped away on the ‘you ’ 
in ‘Are you ready.’ This certainly looks 
like an understood thing.” We beg leave 
to assure the Harvard Advocate , in the most 
emphatic of typographic language that it 
WAS “an understood thing”; and to offer it 
our thanks for giving us a chance to prove 
by its own utterances Harvard’s disgraceful 
treachery. For a few years past it has been 
remarked by everyone that the Yale boat has 
shown an unaccountable slowness in getting 
off — Harvard always shooting ahead a boat’s 
length or so before its rival’s oars move the 
water. This year, on the contrary, it was a 


The Advocate-Courant Controversy 


>7 


matter of general comment and congratula- 
tion, that the two boats started at the same 
identical instant. The reason of the phenom- 
enon was a simple one : in former years Yale 
has waited with sturdy honesty for the 4 Go,’ 
only to have Harvard “ quietly slip away on 
the ‘ you ’ of ‘ Are you ready ?’ ” This year’s 
Yale captain thought that the scandalous 
game had been played long enough, and so 
had it “distinctly understood ” by his men 
that they were to start with the starter’s tirst 
word. How was it with the Harvard crew, 
whose captain had taken special pains to 
have the interval between the “ Ready?” and 
the “ Go !” lengthened to five seconds? As 
before said, it is undisputed and notorious 
that they started on the exact second with 
their rivals ! What other explanation can be 
offered than this, that Harvard, not satisfied 
with its ordinary advantage at the start, had 
plotted in cold blood to defraud the Yale 
men of a clear five seconds at the very outset 
of the race ? It is worth saying, however, 
that the Yale judge distinctly told the Har- 
vard captain, when he repeated his “ five 
seconds,” demand, just before the start, that 
the word would be given in the usual way. 

Well, the two crews, whose mutual sharp 
practice had given them an even start, shot 
off up the lake, and were out of sight. Of 
the alleged foul on the way up, we will say 
nothing here. Harvard, spurting desper- 
ately, could not widen the gap which it had 
at first put between itself and its rival, and 
the steady strokes of the Yale crew brought 
their craft close upon the other, as the stake 
was neared. Against this, Harvard, in 
attempting a short turn, bumped its boat, 
and sharply enough, too, to snap its wires 
and unship its rudder, whatever may be the 
fact as to whether or not this really hap- 
pened. Yale also, after stopping until Har- 
vard was apparently clear of it, grazed upon 
the stake, and, as the Harvard crew had 
meanwhile thrown their boat directly across 
Yale’s course, the bow of the latter’s boat 
slid for a second over the stern of the Har- 
vard, which latter in another instant was 
shooting off down the lake again. We make 
this concession, — though the collision was 
so slight that some witnesses at the stake 
assert that the boats did not touch at all, — 
but we do not believe that the accident really 
disabled the Harvard boat. At all events, 


having turned the stake, it had no further 
need for a rudder, and the captain’s cry of 
“Now we have ’em, boys!” shows that it 
was not until the Yale boat passed that the 
idea of “ foul ” was thought of, as an excuse 
for unexpected defeat. Yale came in in 
18 m. 45 s. Harvard, after it found it had lost 
the race, with a great display of broken 
wires and dragging rudder, leisurely pulled 
after, in 20m. 30 s. Then, without even wait- 
ing for the report of the judges at the stake, 
it claimed that the flag should at once be 
awarded to itself, and, when finally those 
judges had reported in its favor, it insisted 
that the decision should be no longer post- 
poned. The firmness of the Yale judge, 
however, secured a postponement of the 
matter till evening, and at least the form of 
a “hearing” for Yale. 

The “hearing” commenced in a room at 
the Bay State House, the bow-oar of the 
Freshman crew being the only Yale repre- 
sentative present when the door was locked, 
and a policeman placed before it. Finally, 
after the Harvard men had fully arranged 
their plans with the referee, the Yale men 
were able to force an entrance. It was ruled 
that none but the bow-oars of the two crews 
should offer any testimony, and the “ evi- 
dence ” was elicited by asking the Harvard 
representative such “ leading questions” as 
“ Didn’t the Yale boat run into you ! ” etc. 
By a slip of the tongue, the Harvard man, in 
telling his story, confessed how that, half 
way up the lake, he “ swerved round to the 
right” ; but he immediately “ corrected ” his 
statement when he was reminded that it 
confirmed the very charge which Yale wished 
to bring against him. 

Harvard attempts to make the public 
believe that Yale’s dissatisfaction with the 
referee arose solely from his decision of the 
foul at the stake-boat ; and to keep out of 
sight the existence of any other cause of 
controversy. The real point involved is 
well brought out by Mr. Scranton’s account 
of the “ hearing,” published in the New 
York Evening Post of August 5: “We 
claimed that, before the boats reached the 
stake, where the alleged foul took place, 
Harvard had crowded us out of our course. 
If we could sustain this charge, Harvard, 
by the rules of boat-racing everywhere, 
would be ruled out of the race. Certainly, 


3 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing < 



whether we could sustain the charge or not, 
we had the right to make it, and, in com- 
mon decency, to be heard upon it. But the 
referee at once refused decisively to take 
any testimony whatever on the subject, say- 
ing he would permit no such point to be 
made ! We handed him the printed regatta 
rules, in which it was distinctly stated that, 
if an inside boat jockeyed an outside, she 
should be ruled out from that moment. He 
replied, ‘These rules are for Worcester 
boats, and don’t apply to the college races.’ 
We said : ‘ This is the universal rule of 
boat-racing in America and England.’ ‘Gen- 
tlemen,’ said the referee, ‘the inside boat has 
the right of the course, and can go where 
she likes.’ We said : ‘ If that is so, then she 
can drive the outside boat ashore.’ To 
which he gave this squelcher : ‘Gentlemen, 
I believe that I am the referee, and that my 
decision ends the matter. I decline to hear 
this point discussed, or to take any testi- 
mony upon it.’ And so he shut us up, and 
gave the race to Harvard. 

“ Very well. Now, Mr. Editor, observe 
how this judge, whose decisions we are 
called upon to admire, ignores his own 
principle of five minutes previous, when, by 
his adhering to it, Yale would be advan- 
taged. In the Freshman race, Amherst had 
the inside ; then Brown, Yale and Harvard. 
Going up the lake, Amherst (which has the 
inside, mind you, and therefore, according 
to the referee’s statement not ten minutes 
before, has the right of the course, and, 
according to the referee, can row all over 
the lake, if she likes) appears, according to 
the testimony, to swerve a little to her right, 
whereupon Brown runs into her, and 
damages her, so as virtual ly to throw her 
out of the rest of the race. Now, according 
to the referee’s principle laid down in the 
university race, if ever there was a dead 
foul, this was one. To declare it so, how- 
ever, would give the race to Yale, who 
came in second. He therefore decides that 
Brown did not foul Amherst, and gave the 
race to Brown. He also took testimony as 
to Yale’s having crowded Harvard in this 
race, the very thing he had refused to do in 
the university decision.” 

In the face of all this, the Advocate thinks 
it “ needless to go into the particulars,” 
because that — “after a long and patient 


j hearing of all parties ” — every charge 
brought forward by the Yale men was com- 
pletely overthrown by the testimony of their 
own side ! Ouite as far from the truth is it 
in saying that, about the stake-boat affair, 
the Yale judge or men “raised the extra- 
ordinary and before unheard of point of 
‘ accidental foul.’ ” The expression origi- 
nated with no less a personage than Mr. 
William Blaikie. In deciding the Fresh- 
man race, he asked the Brown boys if their 
running into the Amherst boat was not 
“ purely accidental ? ” and they said that it 
was, and so he gave them the race. In the 
case of the stake-boat mishap, the Yale 
judge simply drew attention to the circum- 
stance, in suggesting the possibility that the 
Harvard boat was at fault, in that, after 
making the turn, it stopped still, direct^ in 
the course of its rival, for no other apparent 
purpose than to delay it, while it gave a 
breathing spell to its own exhausted crew, 
The refusal of Yale’s challenge to row the 
race over again can hardly be accepted by 
any rational mind as anything else than a 
sign of cowardice. The Advocate' s claim, 
that the* acceptance of it would be a confes- 
sion that Harvard was wrong and Yale right 
in everything, is almost as absurd as the 
pretexts urged at the time — that the crew 
had broken training — that one of them must 
leave town that night — that they didn’t want 
to snub the referee — and so on. How does 
this compare with Yale’s action in 1865, 
when, after winning an unexampled victory, 
it consented to a second trial, in the next 
day’s “ citizens’ races,” the result of which, 
though favorable to Yale, put anothei 
“ argument ” in Harvard’s hands for belittle- 
ing the glory of the day before? The pre- 
posterous assertion that “ Harvard has 
always given way to Yale,” at the time of 
the race, “ in every point of difference that 
has occurred,” makes it worth recalling the 
facts that Yale has time and again asked 
for a “ straight away” race, on a course like 
that at New London or Springfield, where 
there is no possibility of mishap, and that 
Harvard has always refused ; that Yale at 
Worcester demanded two turning-stakes, 
and that Harvard refused ; and so on 
through the list. It is, of course, true that 
Harvard has to wait for the race a month 
later than it wishes; but, so long as the 














\The Advocate-Courant Controversy. 


T 9 


faculty refuse to allow the Yale crew to row 
in term-time, there seems to be no help for it. 

We have put off till the end our rejoinder 
to the Advocate s only point against Yale, 
which has even the shadow of reason to sup- 
port it : the insulting words offered by the 
Yale trainer, Walter Brown, to the defeated 
Harvard crews. His disgraceful taunts were 
of course in the highest degree exasperating ; 
and were regretted by no one more than by 
the Yale men upon whom Harvard unjustly 
attempts to cast the odium. So long as 
Harvard refused to agree to Yale’s wish that 
all boats should be ruled off the course, Mr. 
Walter Brown had the right of an American 
citizen to be present there. If he acted un- 
becomingly, to him alone belongs the re- 
proach. He had been upon the water at 
previous University races, long before Yale 
ever employed him as trainer, and there is 
no reason to suppose that, even if he had 
nothing to do with the Yale crew this year, 
he might not have gone to Worcester and 
vented his personal spite against the Har- 
vard men in exactly the same fashion. He 
had nothing whatever to do with the Fresh- 
man crew, however, and the Advocate s asser- 
tion that he “coached” them on the race, in 
defiance of an express agreement among the 
crews that nothing of the sort was to be al- 
lowed, is of course untrue. But while wash- 
ing our hands of all responsibility for the 
personal actions of a “ professional ” trainer, 
we cannot help remarking that the exultant 
cries on the part of “the Yale hireling,” 
Walter Brown, seem to us less censurable, 
on the score of “gentlemanliness” and “de- 
cency,” than the rufhanlike display of pugi- 
lism, on the part of the Harvard graduate, 
judge and representative, William Blaikie. 

C-H- S. 

[From the Harvard Advocate, Nov. ll.] 
COMMUNICATION. 

We have read an article in the College 
Courant of Oct. 29, entitled “ Worcester Once 
More,” and we are forced to admit that, in 
our opinion, the Courant has for once spoken 
unadvisedly. Four and a half columns are 
filled with vituperation of Harvard and Har- 
vard men ; and we are sorry to say. that the 
numerous assertions in which the Courant 
indulges seem to rest on very slight authority. 

Now the only point on which Harvard’s 
right to the flags and medals could be right- 
13' disputed, was the question whether she 
had been fouled by Yale at the stake; for 
(the Courant to the contrary notwithstanding) 


any one conversant with the rules of boating 
would not for a moment entertain the claim 
of foul which Yale made, where Harvard 
was only accused of bad steering, and it was 
not even asserted that the boats “collided.” 
There were in the stake-boat, if we re- 
member right, two reporters, two men to 
row, one man from the Worcester Regatta 
Committee, a stake judge each for Brown, 
Amherst, Harvard, and Yale, and a stake 
referee. All these, without hesitation, re- 
ported that Yale fouled Harvard at the 
stake, though the reports of the last three 
alone had official weight ; and none of these 
! men asserted that the Harvard boat was in- 
jured by a collision with the stake as the 
Courant maintains. Now it is evident to the 
judicial mind that the referee had to give his 
decision in accordance with this testimony, 
which he did. After this, any reflections on 
; the justice of the decision were unwise as 
! well as ungentlemanly. 

We are sorry to hear from the Courant the 
acknowledgment that Yale’s advantage at 
! the start “ was an understood thing,” as we 
had before considered this charge merely an 
outbreak of partisan feeling on the part of a 
i brother contributor ; but we are most deeply 
sorry that the Courant should fill a page and 
a half of its really valuable room with a most 
insulting attack on Harvard, which, aside 
from its glaring injustice, only serves to in- 
crease the existing indignation, and to widen 
the gap which there is at present between the 
two leading colleges of America. 

OPINION OF THE WORCESTER REFEREE. 

It may perhaps be interesting just now to 
recall the authorized statement of Mr. Edwin 
Brown, the referee in the Worcester races : — 
“There was at the upper stake-boat the 
judges of Yale, Harvard, Brown, and 
Amherst, besides Mr. C. O. Baldwin, and 
Mr. William M. Olin of the Boston Adver- 
tiser. When they came down I asked them 
if there had been a foul, and they all said 
that Yale had fouled Harvard, speaking of 
it as one of the most evident fouls they ever 
saw. I asked the Yale judge, when he 
came down, if there had been a foul, and he 
said ‘ Y-e-es.’ He did not deny it ; but just 
then the other Yale judge used his exertions 
to have the matter put off' until evening. 
He said : ‘ We won’t decide the matter now ; 
i we will hold on a bit.’ I might just as well 
have decided then as afterwards, but entirely 
to gratify Yale I put olT my decision until 
evening. The point about the Harvard 
j pushing the Yale from the course was not 
| brought up until that evening at the Bay 
State House. I should think it was not 
more than five or ten minutes before I made 
my decision. It seemed to me evidently 
only ‘a straw.’ I asked Phelps whether the 
Harvard had touched oars with them, and 
whether the Yale had been crowded into the 
bank so as to touch their oars, and he 
answered distinctly, ‘No.’ I then refused to 


20 


Vale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


consider any evidence on that, because I 
thought it had nothing to do with the race. 
The boats have to make a turn around the 
Point to round the stake-boat because the 
course is not straight. I saw from the 
judges’ boat that Yale was not taking a 
straight course up the lake.” 

Mr. Brown further said that he did not 
take this complaint into account, because he 
did not consider that the course which Har- 
vard had steered had been such as to inter- 
fere with the fairness of the race. The com- 
plaint was entirely an afterthought on the 
part of Yale, when they found the decision 
was going against them. * * * * * 

“ If I had any feeling at all it was in favor of 
Yale, for I wanted to see them beat this 
year.” 

[A number of communications have been 
received on the Courant article, but it has 
been thought best to defer further discussion 
until a reply to our Boat Club’s letter is 
received from Yale. — Eds.] 

At a meeting of the Boat Club, held 
Wednesday, Nov. 9, the following resolution 
was adopted : — 

Whereas it is doubtful whether the article 
which appeared in the College Courant of Oct. 
29 (entitled “Worcester, Once More”), is 
authorized or indorsed bv the Yale Navy: 

Resolved , That a letter be immediately 
written to the Yale Boat Club, inquiring 
whether they authorize or indorse the views 
expressed in that article. 

[From the College Courant, Nov. 19 .] 
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA. 

“A Communication” appears in the Har- 
vard Advocate of Nov. n, which seems to 
need a reply. Spite of the ambiguous head- 
ing, as the remarks are expressed with the 
“ editorial we ” and are not accompanied by 
any signature, we accept them as the utter- 
ance of the paper in which they appear. 
The Advocate , then, refers to our plain state- 
ment of the facts concerning the last Univer- 
sity race (“Worcester, Once More,” in our 
issue of Oct. 29), as “four and a half 
columns of vituperation of Harvard and 
Harvard men”; thinks that “for once we 
have spoken unadvisedly” in saying what we 
said ; and “is sorry to sav that our numer- 
ous assertions seem to rest on very slight 
authority.” Without attempting to disprove 
them at all, however, it goes on to make this 
counter assertion of its own : “ Now the only 
point on which Harvard’s right to the (lags 
and medals could be rightly disputed, was 
the question whether she had been fouled by 
Yale at the stake; for anyone conversant 
with the rules of boating would not for a 
moment entertain the claim of foul which 
Yale made, when Harvard was only accused 
of bad steering, and it was not even asserted 
that the boats ‘collided ’.” 

It is certainly refreshing to be talked to in 
that way, and to have the most fundamental 


and universal of boating rules — that no boat 
shall steer across the straight course of 
another rival boat — so coolly denied. But, 
then, quite aside from this, how is the 
Advocate to explain the ugly fact (which we 
are unkind enough to insist upon dinning 
into its ears until it can answer our ques- 
tion) that the model young referee of Wor- 
cester recognized the rule when it worked 
to the disadvantage of Yale, and refused to 
recognize it when it might work to Yale’s 
advantage? In the Freshman race, — to tell 
the old story once again, — he (very properly) 
ruled that, though the Brown boat disabled 
the Amherst, the latter could not claim a 
foul because, “Simply for its bad steering,” 
it deserved to be run into. Had he ruled 
Brown out, the Yale Freshmen, who came 
in second, would have had the race. But in 
the University contest, when Yale offered to 
prove that Harvard had driven it out of its 
course, he ruled that “the inside | Harvard] 
boat had a right to row where it chose,” 
and — to use his own words, which, strangely 
enough, the Advocate quotes, as if they 
strengthened its position, — he “ refused to 
consider any evidence on that point, because he 
thought it had nothing to do with the race”! 
What amount of admiration seems due to a 
referee who publicly announces that he 
“refused to hear any evidence” upon a 
most vital point, because he “thought” it 
had nothing to do with the race ; when five 
minutes before, in a similar case, he had 
listened to all the evidence upon exactly the 
same point, and given his decision in accor- 
dance with it? 

But the Advocate , boldly ignoring this 
unpleasant dilemma, tries to convey the 
impression that Yale is chiefly dissatisfied 
with the decision of the foul at the stake- 
boat, and that it attempts to deny that any 
such foul took place. “ None of the judges 
at the turn asserted that the Harvard boat 
was injured by a collision with the stake, as 
the Courant maintains.” The Advocate well 
knows that we maintained nothing of the 
sort. Our words were these : “ Against this 
stake, Harvard, in attempting a short turn, 
bumped its boat, and sharply enough, too, to 
snap its wires and unship its rudder, what- 
ever may be the fact as to whether or not 
this really happened.” In the face of this 
distinct refusal to express any opinion upon 
a point concerning which we had no certain 
testimony at our command, the Advocate 
declares us to “maintain” that the Harvard 
boat was injured by its collision with the 
stake ! 

But the most glaring injustice to and mis- 
representation of our remarks is this : “ We 
are sorry to hear the acknowledgment that 
Yale’s advantage at the start ‘ was an under- 
stood thing,’ as we had before considered 
the charge merely an outbreak of partisan 
feeling on the part of a brother contributor.” 
Now, it is an indisputable fact, which every 
printed account of the race — among others. 


The Advocate-Conrant Controversy . 


21 


Mr. William Blaikie’s, in the Tribune — lays 
special stress upon, that so perfectly even a 
start has rarely been made as was made by 
the two rival boats in the last university 
race. It “was ‘an understood thing,’” we 
said, among the Yale men, that they were to 
start “ on the ‘ you ’ of ‘ Are you ready ? ’ ” in 
order to “get even” with Harvard, which 
had for some years been in the habit of gain- 
ing an unfair advantage by doing this very 
thing. The point we made was, that while 
the Harvard captain, by the Advocate's own 
admission, tried - this year to have the time 
between the “ Ready? ” and the “ Go ! ” pro- 
longed to five full seconds, he adhered to his 
old trick of starting his crew “on the ‘you ’ 
of ‘Are you ready? ’ ” The result was that, 
as Yale, warned by experience of previous 
treachery, did the same thing, both boats 
started at the same identical instant. Once 
again, then, we challenge the Advocate to 
give any other explanation of the fact than 
this, “that Harvard, not satisfied with its 
ordinary advantage at the start, had plotted 
in cold blood to deprive the Yale men of a 
clear Jive seconds at the very outset of the 
race !” 

We have no comment to make upon the 
overbearing arrogance and sublime super- 
ciliousness displayed by the Advocate in this 
controversy, further than to say that we shall 
not allow it to put us out of temper, or to 
blind the public as to its utter inability to 
fairly disprove our charges. We shall insist 
upon sticking close to the main question, 
and holding the Advocate down to the real 
facts of the case. It may call our plain 
statements “columns of vituperation,” or 
“ insulting attacks,” or “glaring injustice ” ; 
it may talk of its “ insulted but victorious 
crew,” of “ ungentlemanly treatment at the 
hands of Yale,” of “expecting to meet gen- 
tlemen and be treated like gentlemen,” of 
“fair minded, gentlemanly views,” of “ things 
which do discredit to those whom we had 
considered gentlemen ” ; it may try to throw 
upon Yale the responsibility for the moral 
character of Walter Brown, and call him “ a 
professional hireling,” and order that he be 
no longer employed as a trainer, and ask us 
to “start a purse for the little wanderer” in 
his bankruptcy; all these things it may do 
until doomsday, without drawing out a sin- 
gle ill-natured retort from us, or dragging 
us into the tu-quoque wrangle which it so 
much desires. We shall simply cling to the 
position taken in our article of October 29, 
— a position which we believe to be impreg- 
nable, — and, as often as need be, shall 
oppose Yale facts to Harvard bluster, until 
even the most devout believer in the value 
of “bluff'” shall be convinced of the hope- 
lessness of a successful repetition of the 
tactics of 1865. 

It might once have been thought that the 
Advocate did not fairly reflect the sentiment 
of the college and its boating men ; and 
indeed we had heard that in private the 


latter wqre disposed to admit themselves 
somewhat in the wrong, at least so far as 
to regret their refusal to accept Yale’s 
challenge for a second trial. But when the 
Harvard Boat Club so far loses its dignity 
as to send a formal message to the Yale, 
demanding whether or not the latter 
“endorses” the sentiments of a particular 
newspaper article, we may feel justified 
in supposing it to be capable of anything. 
The action of the club in looking upon 
the request as an impertinence and insult 
which deserved no reply, can hardly be 
thought unnatural, and was perhaps the very 
thing which Harvard expected and desired. 
But that the Advocate may have no excuse for 
shirking a reply to the damaging statements 
of “ Worcester, Once More,” we beg leave to 
assure it that while that particular article — 
like every other editorial utterance of this 
paper — was “authorized and endorsed ” by 
no one save ourselves, yet it has so happened 
that its sentiments have given universal and 
entire satisfaction among all the undergradu- 
ates of the college, and have been accepted 
by them as a perfectly fair statement of 
Yale’s position in the matter. 

The action of the Boat Club, too — in put- 
ting into formal terms the unanimous opin- 
ion which since last July has prevailed 
among all friends of the college, and lovers 
of fair play generally, that no Yale crew can 
ever again row at Worcester, — meets with 
our hearty approval. Harvard must now de- 
cide whether it will consent 1 to engage in a 
race where the arrangements are such as to 
render foul play or contention of any sort 
absolutely impossible, even though both the 
parties should desire it ; or take upon itself 
the responsibility of breaking up the system 
of university races altogether. We repeat 
once more that our article of Oct. 29, fairly 
reflects the Yale view of the late University 
race, and we once more call upon the Advo- 
cate to defend itself from our charges. 

L~ ( (C $ • 

[From the Harvard Advocate, Nov. 25.] 
COMMUNICATION NO. II. 

The article in the Advocate of Nov. nth, 
entitled “Communication,” was, as it pur- 
ported to be, from the pen of one entirely 
unconnected with the paper ; and I must 
apologize to the Courant for misleading its 
managers by the use of the editorial “ we,” 
which pronoun was employed from ignor- 
ance of journalistic etiquette. 

The Courant , in its attack upon the above- 
mentioned article, entirely mistook the 
spirit of the writer, which was intended to 
be as impartial and dispassionate as he 
could make it, and as conciliatory as was 
possible, coming, as it did, from the party 
which occupied the stronger position. The 
point as to whether a boat which neither col- 
lided with another nor forced that other upon 
any obstacle can be said to have committed 
a foul upon it, no one, I hope (except of 


22 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


course a Yale man when so far out of his 
element as to argue upon boating matters) 
Avill be absurd enough to entertain ; but the 
Courant asserts or strongly implies that the 
case of the foul between the Amherst and 
Brown Freshman crews, and that of the al- 
leged bad steering of the Harvard crew in 
the University race, are parallel ; and here 
there is surely some mistake. The fact that 
the Amherst crew did not have enough of a 
lead to allow them to cross Brown’s bow was 
sufficiently shown by the resulting collision ; 
while the utmost endeavors of the Yale men 
were unable to bring them so near to the 
Harvard boat as to give them the opportunity 
of fouling till the Harvards turned the stake. 
But all this argument is based upon the Cou- 
rant' s assumption (an after-thought as it was, 
and trumped up by Yale when every other 
pretext failed) that Harvard did not steer 
straight ; but several of my associates at the 
stake, as well as I myself, noticed that the 
steering from the start to the stake was as 
straight as possible. The Courant seems dis- 
posed to bring in irrelevant matter, but these 
charges are ali that it appears to be worth 
while to consider ; for we trust that the pub- 
lic mind will rise superior to the palpable 
idiocy of the charge that Harvard “ plotted 
in cold blood to deprive the Yale men of a 
clear five seconds at the very outset of the 
race,” and similar affirmations. 

I am glad to see that the temper of the 
Courant was, as usual, serene, even while 
perpetrating such absurdities as appeared in 
the last number; and it is only lack of time 
which induces me to pass over its witty 
sneers with no more than this slight notice. 

G. H. G. 

[The above communication calls for a word 
of explanation on the part of the editors of 
the Advocate. The discussion started by the 
resolution of the H. B. C., inquiring into the 
authority of the College Courant to state Yale’s 
opinions on matters in which Yale under- 
graduates are concerned, arose from the sup- 
posed “ independent ” position of the Courant. 
Yale has never before recognized the Courant 
as its organ, and from this generally received 
opinion arose the resolution referred to.] 

vale’s rejoinder. 

We clip the following from the College 
Courant of Nov. 19. Comments are neither 
appropriate nor necessary, but we will say, 
and do say, that we have not read any thing 
more deliciously ridiculous than this, for 
seventy or eighty years: — 

“A meeting of the Yale Boat Club was 
held in the President’s lecture-room at two 
o’clock on Wednesday afternoon, and though 
the call had been issued only a few hours, 
there was a very fair attendance. 

“The chairman then read a duly certified 
letter, which had been received from the 
Harvard Boat Club, asking a formal reply to 
the following resolution, which had been 


adopted by the H. B. C., at a meeting held 
Nov. 9 : 

‘ Whereas , It is doubtful whether the ar- 
ticle, which appeared in the College Courant 
of Oct. 29 (entitled “ Worcester Once More ”), 
is authorized or indorsed by the Yale Navy : 

‘ Resolved , That a letter be immediately 
written to the Yale Boat Club, inquiring 
whether they authorize or indorse the views 
expressed in that article.’ 

“In reply to this, several speeches were 
made, the gist of which was that the Harvard 
resolution was too puerile and impertinent 
to deserve any reply. It was accordingly 
voted, with great unanimity, that no atten- 
tion whatever be paid to it. The captain 
then stated, in behalf of the University crew, 
that although every one of their number had 
resolved that they would never row a race at 
Worcester again, under any circumstances ; 
and although it seemed to be the universal 
opinion among Yale men and the public 
generally, that no Yale crew with any sense 
of self-respect could ever again consent to 
row there, it nevertheless appeared desirable 
thus early to have a formal and authoritative 
statement of this sentiment officiallv indors- 
ed by the Boat Club. After some little dis- 
cussion as to the best mode of expressing 
this resolve, a motion was passed to this 
effect: that no Yale crew shall be allowed 
to challenge a corresponding crew of Har- 
vard except for a “ straight-away ” race | of 
three miles], upon any course in the United 
States which Harvard may select. The meet- 
ing then adjourned.” 


[From the College Courant, Dec. 3.] 
SILENCE GIVES CONSENT. 

“Communication No. II.,” in the Harvard 
Advocate of Nov. 26, states that the former 
“ Communication,” on which we commented 
a fortnight ago, was not the utterance of that 
paper itself, but only of an individual cor- 
respondent, who in this present case ex- 
presses himself in the first person singular, 
and signs himself “ G. H. G.” With all his 
former modesty he now says that “ the Cour- 
ant, in its attack upon the above-mentioned 
article, entirely mistook the spirit of the 
writer, which was intended to be as impar- 
tial and dispassionate as he could make it 
[make what? the “spirit,” or the “article”?], 
and as conciliatory as possible, coming, as 
it did, from the party which occupied the 
stronger position.” it will be remembered 
that this dispassionate writer showed his 
conciliatory spirit, in the piece referred to, 
by calling our plain account of the last Uni- 
versity race, “four and a half columns of 
vituperation of Harvard and Harvard men,” 
“an insulting attack on Harvard,” and so 
forth ; and he now, in the same courteous 
style, hopes that no one will be absurd 
enough to believe in that fundamental rule 
of all fair racing (that one boat shall not 
steer across another’s course), “except of 


The Advocate-Courant Controversy. 


23 


course a Yale man when so far out of his 
element as to argue upon boating matters.” 

“ But the Courant asserts or strongly im- 
plies that the case of the foul between the 
Amherst and Brown Freshman crews, and 
that of the alleged bad steering of the Har- 
vard crew in the University races are paral- 
lel.” Exactly ; we have asserted it again and 
again, for it is the vital point of the whole 
controversy, and a point which Harvard has 
hitherto insisted upon ignoring altogether. 
“ G. H. G.” now attempts to get around it by 
claiming that while the Amherst crew did 
not have enough of a lead to allow them to 
cross Brown’s bow (as shown by the fact of 
the collision), “the utmost endeavors of the 
Yale men were unable to bring them so near 
to the Harvard boat as to give them the op- 
portunity of fouling till the Harvards turned 
the stake.” Now, this is a matter of opinion, 
and “ G. H. G.’s ” assertion of his belief 
proves no more than our assertion of exactly 
the contrary belief, that is to say, nothing. 

“ But all this argument,” he hurries on to 
explain, “ is based upon the Courant' s as- 
sumption (an afterthought as it was, and 
trumped up by Yale when every other pre- 
text' failed) that Harvard did not steer 
straight ; but several of my associates at the 
stake, as well as I myself, noticed that the 
steering from the start to the stake was as 
straight as possible.” As, from the nature of 
the course, the boats could not come in sight 
ol the stake for some time after starting, this 
seems a rather absurd assertion, but we are 
willing to overlook its necessary incorrect- 
ness on the supposition that the writer in- 
tended only to assert that, during the time 
the boats were in sight of the stake, “ the Har- 
vard steering was as straight as possible.” 
Perhaps it was, and perhaps the Harvard 
boat was far ahead of its rival all the way up 
the lake; but the Yale men told a different 
story, — and “ whether or not they could sus- 
tain the charge [that Harvard drove them 
from their course], they certainly had a right 
to make it, and in common decency, to be 
heard upon it.” But the referee forthwith — 
to quote his own published words once more 
— “ refused to consider any evidence upon that 
point , because he thought it had nothing to 
do with the race”! Here, then, is Yale’s 
grievance, — which no amount of sophistry or 
assertion or invective gr “argument” can 
possibly smooth over, — that the referee deci- 
sively refused to give their case a hearing. 
Admit that it was “an afterthought,” that it 
was “ trumped up when every other pretext 
failed,” that it was “ utterly absurd and 
groundless,” still the ugly fact remains as 
before, that “ they had a right to make the 
charge, and in common decency, to be heard 
upon it.” It is idle for anyone, at this late 
day, to attempt to prove either that they 
could or could not have supported their 
claim. We have never made any such at- 
tempt. We only insist on keeping public 
attention fixed upon the “ main question,” 


that Yale was denied a hearing altogether. 
It is perfectly true that Yale men do not think 
that the stake-boat foul should have been de- 
cided against them, and they would probably 
not have been satisfied had the referee re- 
fused to admit their claim after hearing the 
evidence in its support. But then, they 
would have had no technical cause of com- 
plaint, and however much they might have 
grumbled among themselves, they would 
have uttered no public word of protest 
against the decision of the referee, or against 
Harvard’s refusal to engage in a new trial. 

“The Courantf says “ G. H. G.,” “seems 
disposed to bring in irrelevant matter, but 
these charges are all that it appears to be 
worth while to consider; for we trust that the 
public mind will rise superior to the palpable 
idiocy of the charge that Harvard ‘plotted 
in cold blood to deprive the Yale men of a 
clear Jive seconds at the very outset of the 
race,’ and similar affirmations.” Having by 
the use of this pleasing phrase, got rid of 
answering a thing which we have twice 
proved, by the Advocate’s own admissions, to 
be a fact, “ G. H. G.” closes with the remark 
that it is only the lack of time which induces 
him to pass over our “ witty sneers” with so 
slight a notice. An appended editorial note 
states that “ the discussion, started by the 
resolution of the H. B. C., inquiring into the 
authority of the College Courant to state Yale’s 
opinions on matters in which Yale under- 
graduates are concerned, arose from the sup- 
posed ‘independent’ position of the Courant. 
Yale has never before recognized the Courant 
as its organ, and from this generally received 
opinion arose the resolution referred to.” 
The Advocate also quotes our account of the 
action of the Yale boating meeting of Nov. 
16, with the editorial remark, “ Comments 
are neither appropriate nor necessary, but we 
will say, and do say, that we have not read 
anything more deliciously ridiculous than 
this for seventy or eighty years.” Perhaps 
this is the reason why it publishes none of 
the many communications which it said were 
sent to it in reply to our article of Oct. 29, 
but kept back until a reply to their extraor- 
dinary question should have been received 
by the Harvard Boat Club. 

It is worth while, in conclusion, to draw 
attention to several significant facts. The 
controversy was begun by the Advocate, 
which, nearly three months after the events 
had happened, published an account of the 
race, for the avowed purpose of correcting 
the “misrepresentations” of the “New York 
and other papers”; but really for the pur- 
pose of giving Harvard the “ last say” upon 
the matter. In return, we published an ex- 
tended account of all the facts of the race, 
and of Yale’s real grievance, and took occa- 
sion to refute some of the Advocate's state- 
ments and to use others as proof of certain 
damaging charges against Harvard. The 
Advocate has itself made no reply to this. It 
has let one or two correspondents speak 



Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing . 


through its columns, and has thrown outl 
various disconnected slurs and “little digs,” 
but editorially it has made no attempt to 
clear itself. And though its original article 
was confessedly written in reply to the “ New 
York and other papers,” it excuses itself from 
attempting to answer the reply to that arti- 
cle, on the ground that the paper in which it 
appeared did not “represent Yale under- 
graduates,” and was not a “ recognized Yale 
organ”! We certainly make no claim that 
our paper is an “organ” of Yale or any 
other college, or that its utterances “ repre- 
sent ” the opinions of anyone but ourselves 
(though it chanced that our reply to the 
Advocate did give general satisfaction to the 
boating men of the college) ; but we cannot 
see why the force of our facts and logic 
is thereby lessened at all : and we do not 
believe that if the Advocate felt able to dis- 
prove the plain charges of “ Worcester, Once 
More,” it would hesitate to do it, even had 
the article been published in the Sitka Times 
instead of the New Haven Courant. C f 4 


[From the College Courant, Dec. 17.] 


A VOICE FROM BROWN. 

Brown University’s literary representative, 
the Brunonian monthly magazine, naturally 
arrays itself upon the side of Harvard in the 
boating controversy, and speaks about last 
summer’s Worcester races with a wildness 
almost worthy of the Advocate itself. It says, 
for example, that “ the Yale papers find fault 
with the referee for not giving the Freshman 
race to Yale, though the Brown crew beat it 
by over six lengths, or, if allowance be made 
for the time lost in the foul with Amherst, 
by more than fifteen lengths.” 

Now, although we have given a very close 
attention to this matter, and have read about 
everything printed concerning it, we have 
never yet met with anyone, either at Yale or 
elsewhere, who either in print or in conver- 
sation, has ever found any fault with the 
referee for giving the Freshman race to 
Brown. The only remark we can think of 
which even hints at any such absurd claim 
is the self-evident truth, which has been so 
many times repeated, that on the same prin- 
ciple by which the referee said that the inside 
(Flarvard) boat in the university race “could 
row where it liked,” the inside (Amherst) 
boat in the Freshman race could also row 
where it liked ; and so, as the Brown ran it 
down, it put itself out of the contest, and 
the Yale Freshmen, who came in second, 
won the race. But this example has invari- 
ably been brought up only to show the utter 
folly of the referee’s decision, that the “ in- 
side boat could row where it liked.” Yale 
has insisted upon it that he decided aright 
in the Freshman race, by riding out Am- 
herst, for rowing across its rival’s course, 
and that hence, in the university race, he 1 
ought to have ruled out Harvard for doing j 
the same thing, provided, of course, that the 


fact could be proved. But here he squarely 
contradicted his former righteous decision 
of the Freshman race, and refused to take 
any evidence. 

Another writer in the Brunonian also 
seems to be badly cut up because the com- 
piler of the Yale Banner , in making out his 
tabular statement of “ Yale vs. Harvard,” 
merely announced that in the Freshman race 
the Yale crew were victorious over the 
Harvard, without mentioning the other 
competing boats, or the fact that the Brown 
Freshmen really won the race. We our- 
selves rather questioned the taste of the 
Banner in doing this ; but then it is silly to 
assert that it or any “ other Yale publica- 
tion ” claims that the Yale crew won the 
Freshman flag and medals. “The time 
made by the Yale Freshmen was 1945, and 
not 19.35, as has been persistently stated by 
every Yale publication,” says the writer, and 
we presume likely he may be correct in say- 
ing so. When we wrote our article of Oct. 
29 (“ Worcester, Once More ”), we happened 
to have seven different newspaper accounts 
before us, three of which said “ 19.35,” and 
four of which said “ 19.45.” Accordingly, 
in lack of any certain evidence, we adopted 
the figures which were the most flattering to 
the Yale crew. We presume the Lit. came 
at the result in about the same way, and the 
Banner , comparing the two statements, 
accepted “ 19.35 ” as, of course, the correct 
figure. Now that our attention has been 
drawn to the point, however, we find that a 
majority of the newspaper accounts give 
“ 19.45 ” ; and so we presume the Brunonian 
writer may be right in calling the “Yale 
publications ” to account ; but he is wrong 
in blaming them for a blunder which origi- 
nated elsewhere, and in supposing them to 
have connived together for forcing it upon 
the public. 

We are very much surprised, too, at the 
indignation over our statement that “ the 
Brown captain said his crew would, as a last 
resort, consent to row in a separate race 
with Yale” ; since we made it merely by 
way of compliment to them, as distinguished 
from the Amherst men, who appeared more 
stubborn upon this point. The Yale cap- 
tain certainly had the impression that the 
fact was as we stated it ; but if the men of 
Brown insist upon being viewed in a less 
flattering light, we certainly have no objec- 
tion to confessing our mistake in paying 
them an undeserved compliment. 

“ It has always been the expressed desire 
of both Harvard and Yale that other col- 
leges should be represented in this yearly 
inter-collegiate regatta. Imagine our sur- 
prise, then, on our arrival in Worcester, to 
learn that Yale would not accept our chal- 
lenge to row at the same time as with Har- 
vard, nor in any way make a match that 
would give us the chance to win the flags 
and medals. She was indeed willing to row 
us on the Monday following the race, not for 


Official Correspondence. 


25 


the flags and medals she confidently ex- j 
pected to take from Harvard, but for 'fun' 
But Harvard, more generous, would not 
agree to such a one-sided arrangement, nor 
did the citizens of Worcester intend their 
gift of medals to be monopolized by any one 
college.” 

Thus the Brunonian ; and to appreciate 
the value of its words, the facts of the 
Freshman race must be recalled once more. 
In the month of June, the Yale ’73 boat 
club challenged the corresponding Harvard 
club to a trial for the Freshman champion- 
ship, at the time of the university race, and 
its challenge was in due form accepted. No 
intimations were given that any other crews 
would be allowed to enter the race, and the 
challenges of Amherst and Brown were 
rejected, as a matter of course. On the one 
hand, the Yale Freshmen desired only to 
beat their Harvard rivals ; on the other, they 
knew that there was no room on the course 
for four boats, and that, especially as Har- 
vard insisted upon their being but a single 
stake, fouls would be all but inevitable. 
For the flags and medals they cared not at 
all, and stated distinctly to both Brown and 
Amherst that, should they win them lrom 
Harvard, they would place them open to 
competition again in the subsequent sepa- 
rate races which they offered to row with 
either or both of those crews. “ But the 
Harvard, knowing itself to be the poorest 
crew upon the lake, and believing that if it 
rowed the race it promised to, it would almost 
certainly be defeated, insisted upon having 
the outside colleges take part, not only 
because of the chance that one or the other of 
them might fairly vanquish Yale, but also 


for the opportunity thus afforded for jockey- 
ing and favoritism in the decision of the 
fouls which were almost certain to happen.” 
This is the explanation of Harvard’s “gener- 
osity” ; but for our own part, we consider 
honor and justice more preferable qualities. 

It is worth remembering, too, though we 
have not made the point before, that, as the 
two best men of the Yale Freshmen crew had 
been transferred to the University a few days 
before the race, it looks suspiciously as if 
the outside colleges wished to force a race 
on Friday in order to avoid meeting the 
Yale Freshmen at their best, since on a 
subsequent day the two university men 
would of course have been able to return to 
their own boat again. However, we are not 
disposed to quarrel about what might have 
been. The Brown crew was certainly a re- 
markably good one, and might very likely 
have beaten the Yale, even when the latter was 
at its best, in the fair separate trial which it 
demanded. We regret that it did not see 
the policy of yielding to Yale’s demand ; we 
regret further that there seems no possi- 
bility of there being another trial of the two 
crews in the coming summer ; and we regret 
most of all that any representative of the 
Brown victors should at this late day 
attempt to falsify the actual facts of the race. 
In bidding the Brunonian good-bye, we 
must remark upon the oddity of its calling 
Harvard “the defeated party.” At least it 
says that the war of words over last sum- 
mer’s regatta was, as usual, begun by the 
defeated party ; and it certainly began no- 
where else than in the Harvard Advocate of 

° ct - r 4- L , f-i, V><. 


OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE. 




I. 

Cambridge, Nov. 10, 1870. 
To the President and Members of the Yale 

Boat Club : 

Gentlemen : — We beg leave to call your 
attention to the following resolution, which 
was adopted at a meeting of the Harvard 
University Boat Club, held Nov. 9 : 

Whereas , It is doubtful whether the article 
which appeared in the College Courant of Oct. 
29 (entitled, “Worcester, Once More”) is 
authorized or endorsed by the Yale Boat 
Club : 

Resolved , That a letter be immediately 
written to the Yale Boat Club, inquiring 
whether they authorized or endorse the 
views expressed in that article. 

George Bass, Pres. 

Wm. T. Sanger, Sec. H. U. B .C. 


II. 

New Haven, Dec. 10, 1870. 
To George Bass, President of H. U. B. C. : 
Dear Sir : — The undersigned, in behalf of 
the Yale University crew, hereby challenge 
the Harvard University crew to row a 
straight-away six-oared shell race, upon the 
14th of July, 1871, on any course hereafter 
agreed upon. 

I. H. Ford, President. 

L. S. Boomer, Secretary Y. U. B. C. 

III. 

Cambridge, Feb. 3, 1871. 
Dear Sir : — I have been directed by the 
Harvard Boat Club to call the attention of 
the Y. U. B. C. to the fact that the H. B. C. 
has as yet received no reply to its last com- 
munication. Yours, very truly, 

Robert S. Russell, Pres. H. B. C, 

1 . H. Ford, Esq. 


4 


2 6 


Yale and Harvard Boat -Racing. 


IV. 

New Haven, Feb. 9, 1871. 
Dear Sir : — I am instructed to say that the 
right of the H.U.B. C. to insist upon an 
answer to the communication referred to in 
your letter of Feb. 3 cannot be acknow- 
ledged by the Yale Boat Club, inasmuch as 
the College Courant is not its organ. 

Yours, respectfully, 

I. H. Ford', Pres. Y. U. B. C, 

R. S. Russell, Esq., Pres. H. U. B. C. 

V. 

New Haven, Feb. 24, 1871. 
Dear Sir : — No reply has been received 
by the Y. U. B. C. to the challenge sent the 
Harvard Boat Club, for a university race 
next summer. I would remind you that the 
delay in answering the challenge is already 
longer than is customary, and that the time 
now left before the day for the race men- 
tioned in the challenge is no longer than is 
necessary for the usual preparation. 

Yours, respectfully, 

I. H. Ford, Pres. Y. U. B. C. 

R. S. Russell, Esq., Pres. H. U. B. C. 

VI. 

Cambridge, March 7, 1871. 
Mr. I. H. Ford, Pres. Y. U. B. C., 

Sir: — We have been directed to notify the 
Yale University Boat Club that their chal- 
lange has been received, and that action will 
be taken upon it in a few weeks. 

Yours, very truly 

Robert S. Russell, Pres. 

Winthrop Miller, Sec. 

VII. 

Cambridge, March 27, 1871. 
Gentlemen : — At a meeting of the execu- 
tive committee of the H. U. B. C., held to 
consider the challenge of the Y. U. B. C., it 
was decided that the H. U. B. C. is willing 
to meet the Y. U. B. C. in any race in which 
all parties are sure of fair play. In order, 
therefore, to attain this desirable end, you 
are requested to send two delegates to a con- 
vention to be held at the Massasoit House, 
Springfield, Mass., on Saturday, April 15, 
1871, for the purpose of establishing a Union 
Regatta of American colleges. An early 
notification of your intention of attending 
the convention would greatly favor the un- 
dersigned. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

G. H. Gould, Pres. H. U. B. C. 

H. S. Mudge, Sec. H. U. B. C. 

To the Y. U. B. C. 

VIII. 

New Haven, April 4, 1871. 
Gentlemen : — The letter of the Harvard 
Boat Club was brought before the Yale Boat 
Club yesterday. The club expressed its 
willingness to contribute all in its power to 
the end of securing a fair race. It was 
thought, however, that the existing challenge 


should be disposed of outside of any con- 
vention, except it be a convention of the two 
clubs concerned. 

Yours very respectfully, 

I. H. Ford, Pres. Y. U. B. C. 

To the H. U. B. C. 

IX. 

Cambridge, May 17, 1871. 

Dear Sir : — At a meeting of the executive 
committee, held in March, to consider Yale’s 
challenge, no definite action was taken, for 
the following reasons: First, it was thought, 
if the challenge was accepted without some 
better understanding between the two clubs, 
the result would probably be as unsatisfact- 
ory this year as it was last ; secondly, if the 
challenge was accepted unconditionally, 
Yale would make the same objections to 
other colleges entering the University race 
this year that she did to their taking part in 
the Freshman race last year, although the 
convention of 1859 expressly stipulated that 
the races should be open to all American 
colleges ; thirdly, Yale could only oblige 
Harvard to row the same kind of race for the 
“ championship ” as that in which that cham- 
pionship was gained. 

For these reasons, and knowing that other 
colleges were desirous of taking part in the 
coming University race, it was decided to 
waive all the privileges of being champion, 
and to invite all American colleges interest- 
ed in boating to meet at Springfield, and 
there establish on a firmer basis the same 
College Union Regatta that was first insti- 
tuted in 1859. This has been done. It was 
thought if Harvard offered to row not Yale 
alone, but all American colleges, at what- 
ever time and place they should determine, 
that Yale would consider the challenge ac- 
cepted, and would immediately enter the 
coming regatta ; especially when it was de- 
cided that it should be a “ straight-away ” 
race, and would probably be rowed at Spring- 
field, conditions that Yale favored in her 
challenge. 

But if reports are true, Yale has determin- 
ed to take part in no race with Harvard un- 
til her challenge is literally answered. Al- 
though that challenge was virtually answered 
by Harvard’s action in regard to the Spring- 
field convention, in order in no way to hin- 
der Yale’s entering the coming regatta, her 
challenge is now answered literally. 

The convention at Springfield appointed a 
committee to make all necessary rules and 
regulations for the coming regatta, and to 
see that they are strictly observed. All par- 
ties. therefore are sure of fair play. Harvard 
will be happy to meet Yale, together with 
other American colleges, in the coming an- 
nual regatta of American colleges at what- 
ever place and at whatever time the com- 
mittee may decide upon. But if Yale refuses 
to take part in the annual regatta of Ameri- 
can colleges, Harvard insists on the right of 
the challenged party to name the place and 


Official Correspondence. 


27 


time ; while Yale can only row for the cham- 
pionship a race similar to that in which she 
was defeated. 

Very truly yours, 

G. H. Gould, Pres. H. U. B. C. 
Robert Grant, Sec. H. U. B. C. 
Mr. I. H. Ford, Pres. Y. U. B. C. 


X. 

New Haven, May 25, 1871. 

Gentlemen : — Y our communication of May 
17 was read before the Y^le Boat Club yes- 
terday, and was received as a non-accept- 
ance of their challenge of Dec. 10, 1870. 

The time between this and the day of the 
race being insufficient for final preparation, 
and the crew having in consequence dis- 
banded, the officers of the club were instruct- 
ed not to recognize any future acceptance of 
the challenge. 

Yours with respect, 

I. H. Ford, Pres. Y. U. B. C. 

G. H. Gould, Esq. 

Robert Grant, Esq. 

XI. 

Cambridge, May 28, 1871. 

Gentlemen : — Your communication of the 
25th inst. has been received. It is evident 
that the Y. U. B. C. has entirely miscon- 
strued the meaning of our letter of the 17th 
inst. We are unable to see how it was pos- 
sible for Yale to understand that letter as a 
rejection of her challenge. 

Harvard as the challenged party named 
the regatta of American colleges for the time 
and place of the race, and we call attention 
to the fact that in our letter we did not refuse 
to row at any other time and place if Yale 
should insist upon a change. The challenge 
stipulated that the race should take place on 
“ any course hereafter agreed upon.” Harvard 
proposed the regatta of American colleges. 
If Yale did not agree to this, she ought to 
have given notification of the fact, and Har- 
vard would then have considered any of 
Yale’s proposals. 

The whole idea of the course Harvard 
has taken in this matter has been to secure 
a race perfectly fair for both parties con- 
cerned. In order, however, to show how 
utterly unfounded is the report which has 
been put into general circulation, that Har- 
vard has been the means of breaking up the 
usual race between our colleges, we now 
make the following proposition, hoping that 
it will not be entirely misunderstood : 

The H . U. B. C. hereby offers to row the Y. 
U. B. C. any kind of a race (“ straight-away ” 
or “ turning" ), at any time and place and for 
any distance that the Y. U. B. C. may name ; 
provide a \ the Y. U. B. C. does not insist upon a 
date which will conflict with Harvard'’ s engage- 
ment with the A talanta Boat Club , and with 
the colleges at the coming regatta. 

If the Yale crew have disbanded and 


therefore think that they cannot get into 
condition for the race, we will remind them 
that the time of the race was not settled last 
year until nearly June 1, and that in the 
present case they can appoint their own 
time. 

G. H. Gould, Pres. H. U. B. C. 

Robert Grant, Sec. H. U. B. C. 

XII. 

[From the Boston Journal, March 14.] 

New Haven, March 8, 1871. 

To the Editors of the Boston Journal : — 

A note from Harvard in your paper of 
March 6, says : “ The demand of Yale for an 
immediate answer to their challenge is un- 
precedented.” The “demand ” referred to is 
this : 

New Haven, Feb. 24, 1871. 

Dear Sir : No reply has been received by 
the Y. U. B. C. to the challenge sent the 
Harvard Boat Club for a University race 
next summer. I would remind you that the 
delay in answering the challenge is already 
longer than is customary, and that the time 
now left before the day for the race mentioned 
in the challenge is no more than is necessary 
for the usual preparation. 

Yours respectfully, I. H. FORD, 

Pres. Y. U. B. C. 

R. S. Russell, Esq., Pres. H. U. B. C. 

If this be a demand, it differs very greatly 
from what it was intended to be. 

The most objectionable feature of the note, 
however, is the term “ immediate.” The 
challenge was sent two or three months ago. 
To delay so long, is, to say the least, taking 
an unfair advantage of the challenging party. 
If there is to be a race, which question the 
challenged party must of course decide, it is 
plainly right that the other party should 
know it in time to prepare ; otherwise they 
may incur expense and train to no purpose, 
or be delayed until proper preparation is 
impossible. 

It is customary to order a new boat for the 
University race before the present time so 
that in case it proves unsatisfactory a new 
one may be obtained, and the crew become 
accustomed to it before the race. 

Here we are at a disadvantage compared 
| with Harvard ; and this together with the 
general indefiniteness of our situation, and 
the indifference with which a crew will train 
unless it be for a definite purpose, I think 
justifies us in asking for a reply. However 
unprecedented such a request may be it is 
certainly not more so than delay which oc- 
casioned it. In conclusion it seems to me 
that the tendency of Harvard this )^ear has 
been to be unaccommodating, perhaps arro- 
gant. In return we have endeavored not to 
be awed or frightened , but in a modest way 
to make our communications positive and 
polite. Very respectfully, 

I. FI. FORD, Pres. Y. U. B. C. 


Yale and Harvard Bo at -Racing. 


28 


[Note by the Compiler.] 

In explanation of the foregoing corres- 
pondence the following facts may be men- 
tioned. In ordinary years it is taken for 
granted that the University race between 
Yale and Harvard will occur the day after 
the former’s Commencement, and the sending 
and acceptance of the challenge, a month or 
two before that date, are mere formalities and 
matters of course. Letter No. 1, as well as 
the general tone of the articles and para- 
graphs in the Advocate , seeming to indicate 
that Harvard might refuse to row another 
race, Yale thought to settle the matter at 
once by sending its formal challenge, five 
months before the usual time, rather than 
engage in or recognize any newspaper con- 
troversy, either by “endorsing” or by “ re- 
pudiating ” a specified newspaper article. 
Accordingly it was voted, as stated on p. 22, 
to take no notice of the letter ; and Letter 
No. 2 (the challenge of Dec. 10) was sent, 
instead. Nearly two monthshaving gone by, 
it began to be given out in private that Har- 
vard would send no answer to No. 2 until 
Yale had answered No. 1, — which impression 
was confirmed by the receipt of No. 3. 
Yale, therefore, rather than give up all 
hopes of a race, withdrew a little from the 
position first taken, and voted, Feb. 8, to 
send the noncommital reply contained in 
No. 4. This formality having been attended 
to, and no reply to No. 2 resulting, the 
example set by Harvard in No. 3 was taken 
advantage of, and No. 5 was forwarded. 

The challenge of Dec. 10 was first brought 
before the Harvard Boat Club at a meeting 
of Friday, March 3, whose action the Har- 
vard Advocate of March 10, thus reports : 
“ After the reading of the challenge, a 
warm discussion arose, in which it became 
evident that the course pursued by Yale last 
summer had not been forgotten, and that it 
would have an important influence in de- 
ciding the main question. There were as 
many different opinions as there were differ- 
ent speakers ; but the main issue was on 
postponing any action whatever until after a 
sober second thought. It was urged in favor 
of delay, that the regular time for receiving 
a challenge had not yet arrived, the custom 
being to act on such matters about the first 
of April ; also, that Yale had transcended 
her privilege by virtually endeavoring to de- 
termine a place for the race, as the Quinsig- 
amond affording no opportunities for a 
“straight away race.” Also, that Yale had 
virtually refused to retract charges to the 
effect that Harvard used unfair means in 
winning the race last year, and finally, that a 
better understanding ought to be had be- 
tween the two colleges before any definite 
action on the part of Harvard is taken. The 
same arguments were used with equal force 
by the other side, which was united in favor 
of immediate action, but a faction of which 
wished immediately to accept the challenge, 
while another faction wished to assume the 


role of injured innocence, as it had a perfect 
right to do, and refuse to have anything 
whatever to do with Yale. After the subject 
had been thoroughly discussed, a motion to 
direct the secretary to inform Yale that their 
challenge was under consideration, and 
would be acted upon in a short time, was 
carried — thirty-eight to thirty-five. From 
which we conclude that a race with Yale is, 
as yet, only a possibility.” Letter No. 6 was 
accordingly sent. But meantime the Boston 
Journal of March 6, at the head of its 
“ current notes,” published the statement 
that “at a meeting of the Harvard Boat 
Club, held last Friday, it was resolved that 
the demand of the Yale Boat Club for an 
immediate answer to their challenge is un- 
precedented,” which statement was widely 
copied by the public press, and finally drew 
out the card from Yale (Letter No. 12), which 
appeared in the Journal of March 14. 

The Advocate of April 14 contained the 
following : “ Our executive committee, who 

were charged, at a recent meeting of the 
club, with the consideration of the challenge 
received from Yale, and the management of 
other important business, have had several 
meetings since the time of the last publica- 
tion of boating matters, and have acted upon 
the task set them in such a way as will exert 
an excellent influence upon the future racing 
between the colleges. First of all, it was 
necessary to take immediate action in regard 
to rowing with Yale, especially as the daily 
papers have lately circulated the statement 
that Harvard had accepted without objec- 
tions Yale’s challenge to row a straight- 
away race. However noble this would seem 
to the minds of some, thus to let our troub- 
les rest, or however inconsistent with all 
ideas of self-respect, it would appear to the 
majority, thus to silently acknowledge the 
imputations contained in the college organs 
regarding the fairness of the last race, the 
dailies are yet a little ahead of the facts of 
the case in making this statement. We 
therefore offer the following correspondence 
to set them right, and to show the work of 
the executive committee since the last meet- 
ing of the club.” [Here follow letters No. 
7 and 8.] Letter No. 7 was read at a Yale 
meeting of April 3, which resulted in the 
sending of No. 8. The sentiment of Yale at 
this meeting was not that of special hostility 
to the idea of a general regatta, but rather 
that its challenge was an independent mat- 
ter which deserved acceptance or rejection 
011 its own merits ; and a committee of two 
were appointed to attend the convention as 
delegates, provided such acceptance or re- 
jection of the challenge were received in 
vacation time. Though it was plain enough 
that if other colleges were to be invited to 
contest in a race hitherto entered only by 
two, both of these two should have joined in 
issuing the call ; and though Harvard’s as- 
sumption of this duty would evidently give 
it the controlling power, by securing to itself 


The Rowing Association of American Colleges. 


29 


the credit of the movement, and so securing 
the votes of all the smaller colleges in any 
dispute which might occur with Yale, — still 
Yale, in eagerness for a race, would appa- 
rently have been willing to ignore these 
damaging facts, and entered the convention, 
had Harvard sent on a refusal of its chal- 
lenge for a separate race. But nothing of 
the sort coming, Yale, at the opening of the 
term, May 8, voted to have nothing to do 
with the general regatta established by Har- 
vard’s convention ; and, in response to an 
attempt at reconsideration, repeated the 
vote, May 13, in a very full meeting, with an 
increased majority. The crew, which had 
up to this time, spite of uncertainty and dis- 
couragement, kept in training, thereupon ac- 
cepted the action as final, countermanded 
their order for a boat, and disbanded. The 
only important part of Letter No. 9, which 
this action brought out, is its closing para- 
graph, which signifies that Harvard would 
consent to but two things: to row a straight 
race with Yale in the general regatta, or to 
row a separate, turn-about race, over the old 
course at Worcester. Either oflfer was noth- 
ing less than a rejection of the challenge of 
December 10 (Letter No. 2), and so Yale had 
no alternative but to pass the vote recorded 
in Letter No. 10. The abrupt change of 
policy by Harvard, as shown in Letter No. 
11, has been variously interpreted, but per- 


haps the remark of “ Nautilus,” in the Ad- 
vocate of May 26, hints at the most plausible 
explanation: “Everybody says that the 

boating interest is dying out among us ; 
and wise counsellors advise us to eat any 
amount of humble pie rather than allow the 
lack of races to help along the growing in- 
difference in this, of all others, the athletic 
sport of Harvard.” As for the closing sen- 
tence of Letter No. 10, it will be seen to lose 
its force, when the fact is remembered that 
in previous years the settlement of prelim- 
inaries of the race was a mere matter of 
course ; and that in the present case the 
chance for the Yale men to “appoint their 
own time” amounted to but little, being 
practically limited to a week or so beyond 
the close of the term (at most, say seven 
weeks after receiving the challenge), — since 
the crew would not be willing to sacrifice 
most of their short vacation for the sake of 
“ the cause.” So, after an exciting meeting, 
and thorough discussion of the matter, Yale 
voted, 120 to 90, to stand by its action of 
May 24, and sent an ambassador to person- 
ally present the case to Harvard, and ar- 
range for a fair and square race in 1872. It 
need only be added that in the Boston 
Advertiser of May 30 the Harvard Boat Club 
inserted Letters No. 2, 7, 9 and 11, as com- 
prising the “full” correspondence up to 

date - L . hi . 'jg . 


THE ROWING ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES. 




[From the Springfield Republican, April 17, 1871.] 
CONVENTION AT SPRINGFIELD. 

The first formal steps for holding a 
national college regatta in July, a scheme 
long entertained and now apparently to be 
carried out, were taken in this city on 
Saturday. A convention of delegates as- 
sembled at the Massasoit house, representa- 
tives being present from Harvard, Brown, 
Bowdoin, and Amherst, and there organized 
“The Rowing Association of American 
Colleges.” The meeting was called to order 
by Mr. Bradley of Amherst, and Mr. Russell 
of Harvard was chairman. A constitution 
and by-laws were framed, and adopted, and 
the association immediately officered as fol- 
lows ; President, C. C. Luther of Brown ; • 
vice president, R. S. Russell of Harvard ; 
secretary, E. P. Mitchell of Bowdoin ; treas- 
urer, A. B. Mormy of Amherst ; regatta 
committee, G. F. Roberts of Harvard, H. 
Cornett of Brown, Leverett Bradley of Am- 
herst, and F. A. Ricker of Bowdoin. These 
by-laws will be of interest to the colleges 
not represented in the convention : 


Article i. — Any American college boat 
club may become a member of this associa- 
tion by sending in a written notification to 
that effect, to the secretary of the association 
on or before the second Wednesday in May, 
1871, and by subscribing to the articles of 
this constitution. 

Article 2. — Any member of the associa- 
tion intending to enter the regatta for 1871, 
shall send in a written notification to that 
effect, to the secretary of the association on 
or before the second Wednesday in May. 

The members of the Springfield Club, 
hearing of the convention, extended their 
hospitalities to the delegates, took them in 
carriages to view the course on the river, 
treated them to an impromptu collation, and 
showed them ever)* courtesy in their power. 
The regatta committee will visit the courses 
in Worcester and New London, but every 
indication, we are happy to say, points to 
the selection of Springfield. The delegates 
expressed themselves greatly pleased with 
the course here, and the only objection 
raised was the bend in the river, opposite 
Warner’s pistol factory. The grand national 


30 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


race will be a “ straight ” one of three miles, 
and it is desired that the course shall be 
actually as straight as possible. Worcester 
is out of the question, having no three-mile 
course, and while New London has a course, 
the risk of rough water incurred there and 
the great lack of hotel accommodations, will 
outweigh all the advantages which that 
sleepy town possesses, and give the regatta 
to Springfield. It is a notable fact that the 
Springfield course has always been a 
favorite one with good oarsmen, and that 
the Wards, the late Walter Brown, and 
others of first-class achievements in this line, 
in sending challenges for races have always 
given Springfield the preference. 

If the regatta comes here it will be made 
the grandest affair of the kind ever seen m 
this country. The general management will 
be entrusted to the Springfield Club, whose 
energy and skill in matters of this kind have 
gained for it a much more than local reputa- 
tion. The races will propably cover two 
days, giving up the first to the grand uni- 
versity race and other college contests, 
should any be made up, and the second to 
both college and citizens’ crews. It will be 
observed that Yale has as yet taken no part 
in the movement. President Ford of the 
Yale navy was in town on Saturday and 
informally consulted some of the delegates, 
but did not attend the convention, not being 
authorized by the Yale association to do so. 
It is believed, however, that now that the 
movement has become a national one, the 
differences between Harvard and Yale will 
be amicably adjusted, and that Yale, with 
the other colleges where boating is prac- 
tised, will send her universitv crew to the 
regatta. Before adjourning, the association 
unanimously passed the following resolu- 
tions : 

Resolved , That the hearty and sincere 
thanks of the association be offered to those 
members of the “ Springfield Club,” who so 
generously and hospitably entertained the 
members of the convention. 

Resolved , That all communications relative 
to the association and the regatta should be 
sent to Edward P. Mitchell, Brunswick, Me. 


[Cor. Norwich Bulletin, April 18.] 

BOATING ADVANTAGES AT NEW LONDON. 

The great question of place has now 
arisen, and for a wonder only two courses 
offer any inducements for the race. One of 
these, the favorite one, is at Springfield, and 
the other, of which I will speak, at New 
London. The advantages of the latter 
course are as follows : The river is perfectly 
straight at this point and the race can there- 
fore be seen from the commencement. 
There, too, the stream is quite wide, there 
being a full quarter of a mile between six 
feet soundings at the narrowest place, a 
thing which is of great importance, as there 
will be at least four boats in the race. At 


no place will a course be found so free from 
all influence, as regards tides, currents and 
eddies ; for the tides rise and fall only two 
and a half feet, and therefore have very little 
effect on the current, which runs at the rate 
of less than a mile an hour ; whereas at 
Springfield the current is quite swift, and 
full of eddies. Of these there are none of 
any account here, as the shore is nearly 
straight and only indented in one or two 
places by bays. Another great advantage is 
the very thing which has been used as an 
argument against New London, namely, 
the want of a place in which to see the race ; 
an argument which might better be urged 
against Springfield, for New London has every 
advantage in this respect. On one side of 
the river is the railroad, which runs, as all 
here know, close to the water’s edge, and up 
which the superintendent says he will run an 
excursion train following the boats from one 
end of the course to the other. On the 
other side is the Groton road, which follows 
the river for four or five miles, and from 
which one can drive on the bluffs above the 
river from which the whole race can be seen. 
On Winthrop’s Point, where the race would 
probably end, is a splendid place for a grand 
stand where every one could see the race 
from the start to the finish. The river is 
wide enough to allow yachts to anchor all 
along the course without interfering in the 
slightest degree with the race. Summing 
up briefly the advantages of New London, 
we have a straight, wide and clear course 
with abundant facilities for viewing the race 
from each side of the river and both ends of 
the course. 

The disadvantages are these — poor hotel 
accommodations, and insufficient interest to 
make it pleasant for the visitors and crews. 
The first of these is but too true, but Norwich 
is only fourteen miles up the river, and the 
superintendent of the New London Northern 
railroad says that he will run trains at re- 
duced rates for the benefit of those who 
choose to spend the night in Norwich. Then 
too there are any number of ways of getting 
out of town. Two steamers leave for New 
York every night at ten, while trains are 
going to Boston, Providence and New Haven 
every hour. The interest manifested in New 
London with regard to the race appears to 
be anything but lukewarm. The mayor with 
whom I have had a conversation says that the 
city will do all that can possibly be done to 
make it attractive and will furnish flags and 
cups to the winning crews. He says also that 
the transportation of boats and crews shall be 
free. If Springfield can do any more than 
this let her try. New London is the most 
central place of meeting for the four colleges 
who belong to the association, being fifty miles 
from Yale, one hundred and seven from 
Harvard, sixty-two from Brown and eighty- 
five from Amherst. Therefore, having the 
natural advantages, if the New London peo- 
ple will but exercise a little of their latent 


The Rowing Association of American Colleges. 


3i 


generosity and beat Springfield on the money 
question, I have not the slightest doubt of 
the choice of the regatta committee. Yale. 


[From the New York World, June 5.] 

RULES AND REGULATIONS. 

At a meeting of the executive committee 
of the National College Regatta, held at the 
Parker House, Saturday afternoon, June 3, 
at 2 o’clock, the final preliminaries of the 
regatta were determined upon, and the rules 
governing the contest were drawn up and 
adopted. The race is to take place at Ingle- 
side, on the Connecticut, six miles north of 
Springfield, and the day settled upon is Fri- 
day, July 21. The following are the rules 
for the regatta : 

I. All races shall be started in the follow- 
ing manner: The starter shall ask the ques- 
tion, “Are you ready?” and, receiving no 
reply after waiting at least five seconds, shall 
give the signal to start, which shall be the 
word “ Go !” 

II. If the starter considers the start unfair 
he shall at once recall the boats to their sta- 
tions, and any boat refusing to start again 
shall be ruled out of the race. 

III. A start shall be considered unfair if, 
during the first ten strokes, any of the com- 
peting boats shall be disabled by the break- 
ing of an oar, or any other accident. 

IV. No fouling whatever shall be allowed. 

V. It is the province of the referee when 
appealed to, but not before, to decide a foul, 
and the boat decided by him to have fouled 
shall be ruled out of the race. 

VI. In case of a foul the umpire, if ap- 
pealed to during the race, shall direct the 
non-fouled boat to row on, which shall in 
every case row over the remainder of the 
course in order to claim the race. 

VII. It shall be considered a foul when 
after a race has commenced any competitor 
by his oar, boat or person comes in contact 
with the oar, boat or person of another com- 
petitor ; and nothing else shall be considered 
a foul. 

VIII. Any competitor who comes into 
contact with another competitor as defined 
in Rule VI, by crossing into his competitor’s 
water, commits a foul ; but when a boat has 
once fairly taken another boat’s water by a 
clear lead, he has a right to keep the water 
so taken. 

IX. A boat shall be decided to have a clear 
lead of another boat when its stern is clearly 
past the bow of that other boat. 

X. It shall be held that a boat’s own water 
is the straight or bow course from the station 
assigned to it at starting ; but if two boats 
are racing, and one fairly takes the other’s 
water by a clear lead, it shall be entitled to 
keep the water so taken to the end of the 
course ; and if the two boats afterwards come 
into contact while the leading boat remains 
in the water so taken, the boat whose water 


has been so taken shall be deemed to have 
committed the foul ; but if they come into 
contact by the leading boat’s departing from 
the water so taken, the leading boat shall be 
deemed to have committed a foul. 

XI. The referee shall be sole judge of a 
boat’s straight or bow course during every 
part of the race. 

XII. If in any race in which more than 
two boats start a foul takes place, and the 
boat adjudged by the umpire to have been 
fouled reaches the winning post first, the race 
shall be decided as the boats come in ; but if 
the boat fouled does not come in first, or if 
the referee is unable to decide which boat 
has committed the foul, the race shall be 
rowed over again, unless the referee shall de- 
cide that the boat which came in first had a 
sufficient lead at the moment of the foul to 
warrant the race being assigned to it. 

XI II . A claim of foul (which must be en- 
tered by the captain of the crew considering 
itself fouled, and not by any one on his be- 
half) must be made to the referee previously 
to the crew fouled getting out of their boat. 

XIV. Every boat shall stand bv its own 
accidents occurring during the race. 

XV. In the event of a dead heat taking 
place, the same crews shall contend again, 
or the crew or crews refusing shall be ad- 
judged to have lost the race. 

XVI. No boat shall be allowed to accom- 
pany a competing boat for the purpose of 
directing its course or affording other assist- 
ance ; and the referee shall be at liberty to 
declare any competing boat out of the race 
that may have derived an unfair advantage 
thereby. 

XVII. No race shall be awarded to any 
competitor or crew unless he or they shall 
have rowed over the whole of the course. 

XVIII. The decision of the referee shall 
in all cases be final. 


[From the Harvard Advocate, June 9.] 

THE BOATING IMBROGLIO. 

The correspondence between Harvard and 
Yale on boating matters, which was lately r 
published in the Advertiser , comprehends so 
much that is new as well as what is old, that 
it ought not to be allowed to pass without 
notice. The old story of the race last sum- 
mer has again been resurrected by the in- 
dustrious Courant, and “the foul” dwelt 
upon with peculiar stress. But it need not 
be noticed here at this late day. We only 
wish to call attention to the new question 
which has arisen out of the correspondence 
in regard to Yale’s challenge. Without en- 
tering too fully into the details of the sub- 
ject, let us endeavor to free ourselves from 
the charge of endeavoring to evade the 
question arising from Yale’s challenge to 
Harvard. 

As if to anticipate any action that might 
be taken by the H. U. B. C., Yale, early in 


32 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


December, sent a challenge to Harvard to 
row a race, the time and manner of which it 
took the liberty to specify. Disregarding 
the fact that as the challenging party Yale 
had no right to do this, and that the chal- 
lenge itself was premature, attention should 
be called to the fact that the union college 
regatta idea was an offset to the whole mat- 
ter. Colleges all around us were beginning 
to take a livety interest in boating. Brown 
and Amherst, that did so well last year, had 
signified their wish to take part in the 
coming college regatta. Knowing, as we 
did, that Yale had complained last year be- 
cause of the admission of other colleges as 
participants in the contest, it was thought 
best to establish matters on a firm basis, and 
see beforehand if some arrangement could 
not be made by which all colleges which 
chose to might be allowed to participate in 
the regatta agreeably to the wishes of all 
parties concerned. To this end we informed 
Yale that a convention would be held at 
Springfield for the purpose of establishing a 
union college regatta, and requested that 
Yale should send delegates who should 
meet those of other colleges and arrange for 
the coming regatta. This we did, not out of 
any wish to evade Yale’s question, but as 
seeming to us the only possible solution of 
the question which the increased interest 
with all colleges in boating proposed. Yale 
did not accept this proposal, but chose 
rather to view it as a refusal on our part to 
accept her challenge. The request of Yale ' 
that a straight-away course should be cho- 
sen, and the to her fatal Ouinsig. given 
up, had been complied with in the union re- 
gatta arrangement. There seems, then, to 
be no reason why she should not take part 
in the race. Was it a desire to meet her 
rival alone? It makes no material differ- 
ence whether two or four boats engage in 
the contest. There is room enough and 
work enough for all. If Yale is able to van- 
quish her rival in a contest when no others par- 
ticipate, then she is also able to vanquish her 
when others participate. It is pure selfish- 
ness and arrogance, which Yale’s position 
by no means allows her to assume, to thus 
contemn the claims of other colleges to a 
recognition. They are all foemen worthy of 
her steel. 

The question of having a union college 
regatta might as well be settled now as at 
any other time. There is not a college near 
us that has not some boating aspirations. 
Indeed, when we see the interest which the 
officers of our colleges, as well as the stu- 
dents, take in boating, we do not see why it 
does not bid fair to become a part of the 
regular college curriculum ; and for Yale to 
endeavor to maintain an aristocracy of mus- 
cle, by refusing to recognize this associa- 
tion, is as foolish as it is ridiculous. 

It was for these reasons that we answered 
Yale’s challenge by inviting her to take part 
in the union regatta. But in order to free 


ourselves from the charges of pusillanimity, 
the offer was made by us to row Yale any 
kind of race, at any time and place, and for 
any distance she might name. By Yale’s 
answer to this challenge we shall probably 
be able to discover whether Yale wishes to 
meet us or not ; whether policy or principle 
is the ruling idea in New Haven. 


[From the Harvard Advocate, June 23.] ■ 
BOATING. 

Now that Yale has refused Harvard’s offer 
to row any kind of a race, at any time and 
place, and for any distance that Yale may 
name, it may not be out of place to publish 
again the facts of the case. The following is 
Yale’s original challenge : — 

New Haven, Dec. io, 1870. 
To George Bass, Pres. IP. U. B. C. 

Dear Sir, — The undersigned, in behalf of 
the Yale University Crew, hereby challenge 
the Harvard University Crew to row a 
“straight-away” six-oared shell race upon 
the fourteenth of July, 1871, on any course 
hereafter agreed upon. 

I. H. Ford, President. 

L. S. Boomer, See. V. U. B. C. 

The following is Harvard’s acceptance of 
the same, at a meeting of the Executive 
Committee : — 


Cambridge, March 27, 1871. 
To I. H. Ford, Pres. Y. U. B. C. 

Dear Sir, — At a meeting of the Executive 
Committee of the Harvard Boat Club, held 
in order to consider the challenge of the 
Yale Boat Club, it was decided that the H. 
U. B. C. is willing to meet the Y. U. B. C. 
in any race, where both parties will have fair 
play. In order to obtain this desirable end, 
you are requested to send two delegates to a 
Convention, to be held at the Massasoit 
House, Springfield, Mass., on Saturday, 
April 15, 1871, for the purpose of establish- 
ing a Union Regatta of American colleges. 
A notification of your intention to attend the 
Convention would greatl) r favor the under- 
signed. 

G. FI. Gould, President. 

H. S. Mudge, Sec. IP. U. B. C. 

The substance of the above correspon- 
dence is, that Yale challenged for a particu- 
lar kind of a race, and Harvard accepted that 
challenge by the clause in her reply, “ The 
H. U. B. C. is willing to meet the Y. U. B. 
C. in any race, where both parties will have 
fair play.” The place of the race was, as the 
challenge stipulated, to be hereafter agreed 
upon. As long as Harvard did not insist 
upon any particular place or conditions, so 
long was Yale bound by all rules of courtesy 
to keep her crew in training for the race. 


The Disputed “ Time ” of 1865 . 


33 


We call attention to the fact that Harvard 
has not , in any of her letters, insisted upon 
any particular place: she has simply given 
Yale to understand that Harvard, as one of 
the parties interested, desired that the race 
(which had been agreed upon between Har- 
vard and Yale) should take place at the time 
and place of the College Union Regatta. 
Notwithstanding the report, extensively cir- 
culated and published by Yale to the con- 
trary, Harvard has never stated that, if Yale 
did not enter the Union Regatta, Harvard 
would not row her at any other place but at 
Worcester. What right has Yale to say that 
Harvard accepted her challenge only on the 
condition that the race should take place at 
the Union Regatta? If Harvard considered 
that a convention of American Colleges 
would be the means of obtaining fair play in 
a race between Harvard and Yale (either 
rowed alone or in company with other Col- 
leges), Harvard was perfectly justified in 
calling such a convention. 

Although Harvard has tried to induce Yale 
to take part in the College Union Regatta, 
still she has never denied Yale’s right to re- 
fuse to do so. And for this reason Harvard 
has carefully avoided insisting in any way 
that the race shall take place at the Regatta 
or not at all. 

Harvard, having by her letter of March 27 | 
accepted Yale’s challenge, expected that Yale 
would at least keep her crew in training until 
it should be certain beyond a doubt that the 
secondary conditions could not be agreed 
upon. But we have since learned from the 
best authority at Yale that, early in April 
(hardly before boating season had opened), 
the Yale University crew disbanded; and 
shortly after the Y. U. B. C. decided that 
Harvard’s course was a non-acceptance of 
Yale’s challenge, simply because Harvard, 
although she had not insisted upon it, still 
had expressed the wish that the race should 


take place in the Union Regatta. Harvard, 
having waited in vain for Yale to agree to 
her proposals as to the place of the race, 
then (in her letter of May 28) offered to allow 
Yale to fix the conditions of the race to suit 
herself. At a meeting of the Y. U. B. C., 
held to take action upon this generous pro- 
posal, it was decided that Yale should row 
no race with Harvard during the present sea- 
son, although for what reasons we are unable 
to see. 

The idea that Yale could not get in condi- 
tion in time for the race will appear ridicu- 
lous when it is known that, not only at the 
time of the Spring Regatta, [line 7, the very 
best rowing material in the College was in 
fine trim and condition, but also that the 
Yale ’73 Class Crew (which is nothing more 
nor less than the University Crew) has 
agreed ro row a race with the Atalantas. 

We leave the reader to judge for himself 
whether the Yale men have acted as they 
ought in thus not only breaking up the cus- 
tomary race between Harvard and Yale, but 
also in circulating the false report that Har- 
vard would not meet Yale in a single race, 
although Harvard had in her letter of March 
27 offered to row Yale any race, limited to 
only one condition ; namely, that both sides 
should have fair play. 

Again, we leave it to the reader whether, 
on the receipt of Harvard’s letter of March 
27, Yale was not as much bound to keep 
herself in readiness for a race this year as 
Harvard was last, when Yale did not send 
any challenge until April (?), and the race 
was by no means settled upon until about 
June 1 st. 

And finally we leave the reader to decide 
for himself whether the course which has 
been pursued by Yale throughout the pre- 
sent season does not look as if Yale was 
determined to get rid of her customary race 
with Harvard at any cost. 


THE DISPUTED “TIME” OF 1865. 


[From Wilkes’s Spirit of the Times, Dec. 5, 1868.] 

yale’s time in the university boat race 

IN 1865. 

Editor Spirit of the Times — Dear Sir : — 
Allow me to introduce this article by a few 
facts which your memory will easily recall. 
In the University race of ’65, Yale won. 
Her time was duly announced by the author- 
ized timekeeper as 17m. 42 i-2s. This time 
received the approval of the judges, and 
awakened no objection from the referee. 
You accordingly recorded it as correct. 
Soon afterwards, the referee, Mr. Ward, 
denied in a card that he had endorsed the 
above time, and declared the true time to be 




18m. 42 i-2s. Following Mr. Ward’s card, 
came a letter from the Yale judge, Mr. 
Wood. This letter, however, written with- 
out previous inquiry into the grounds on 
which Mr. Ward’s statements to the pre- 
judice of 17m. 42 i-2s. were based, failed to 
impair that influence which, as declaration 
of a referee, his statements would naturally 
exert, so long as they stood unexplained. 
At this point you expressed the conviction 
that, in view of Mr. Ward’s card, you must 
adopt the opinion that in giving Yale’s time 
as 17m. 42 i-2s. an error had been com- 
mitted of one minute. Several weeks later, 
in your paper of Nov. 18th, 1865, two other 


5 


34 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing . 


letters, one from Mr. Blaikie, and one from 
the timekeeper, Mr. Maguire, appeared, 
bringing new contributions to this same 
question of time. These provoked no reply, 
and were summed up by you as confirming 
the opinion at which you had lately arrived. 
Trusting that the recital of these facts recalls 
to your mind the state of the controversy 
when it was dropped, I ask your attention to 
the following letter, which I publish by 
permission : 

Cornwall, Aug. 4, 1868. 

Mr. Wilbur R. Bacon — Dear Sir: In 

reply to your letter I would say, the state- 
ment that the time of the winning boat in 
the University race in 1865 was 18m. 42 I-2S. 
which appeared in a card over my name 
shortly after that event, was made under the 
impression that the time (17m. 42 i- 2 S.) 

rested solely on the authority of the Yale 
judge. This gentleman I knew did not 
catch the time when the boats started. I 
therefore accepted iSm. 42 1-2S. — the time 
as I learned it from some parties on shore — 
as the correct time, and so announced it. 
Had I known of the existence of an author- 
ized timekeeper, and that 17m. 42 1-2S. 

came from him, or was sustained by other 
good authority, I should have had no reason 
to question that time. — Respectfully yours, 

Joshua Ward. 

This letter, I apprehend, needs no com- 
ment. 

Among other contributions in denial of 
the time we contend for, Mr. Blaikie’s calls 
for particular notice. This gentleman does 
not doubt for a moment, sir, that Yale’s time 
was 18m. 42 I-2S. His reasons for think- 
ing so — unless he keeps some back — are 
mostly contained in two letters, one of which 
appeared in your issue of November 18, 
1865, and the other a few days since, in a 
leading daily of this city. The reasons 
furnished in his letter to you he charac- 
terizes as reasons why the prevailing opinion 
where he writes from accepts 18m. 42 I-2S. 
as the correct time. The reasons offered in 
his late letter to the public have, if I mistake 
not, their mission of creating a prevailing 
opinion either where he writes from or else- 
where, yet to fulfill. 

First, then, Mr. B. objects that the Yale 
crew made only igm. 5s. on the second day. 
To repeat the mention of the causes to which 
we attribute the poorer time on the second 
day may be superfluous, Mr. Editor, but 
they none the less were present and opera- 
tive. It was a very windy day. We rowed 
simply for the amusement of the spectators, 
and to win with the least necessary effort. 
The men were not really required to extend 
themselves during the race. The know- 
ledge that serious doubt about the time had 
arisen, which would have most powerfully 
influenced the crew to row to silence those 
who disputed the time we contend for, had 
not reached us. But does Mr. Blaikie 


really think a disparity, though considerable, 
in a crew’s time on two consecutive days so 
anomalous? If so, a very limited acquain- 
tance with the history of rowing will unde- 
ceive him. To go no further, let him look 
at the action of the Yale crew at Worcester 
in 1859. On the first of two days, though 
beaten, this crew rowed hard to win in 20m. 
18s. On the second day they won, and cut 
their time down more than a minute — this, 
too, on a day most unfavorable to fast time, 
compared with the preceding (a high wind 
was blowing, to which Harvard ascribed her 
defeat), and with nothing in view to offset 
this disadvantage, or give the slightest 
promise of a reduction in time. 

Again : the Harvard crew did not make 
the time accredited to them in practice. 
This objection, as set out, needs no special 
treatment. If the time imputed to them be 
lower than they actually made, let us have 
the gentleman’s own figures. These, Mr. 
Blaikie produces with alacrity. He asks, 
how could the Harvard crew have made 
18m. 9s., with their Boston time 19m. 45s., 
when the following year they made only 
18m. 43s., with their Boston time 18m. 59s.? 
In other words, how was so great a differ- 
ence between their Worcester and Boston 
time as im. 36s. possible in 1865, when in 
1866 there was a perfect coincidence to 
within sixteen seconds? What are Mr. 
Blaikie’s own figures? He denies that dur- 
ing the few days their crew were at Worces- 
ter they made the course in 18m. 6s. and 
18m. ios., as some persons timed them, and 
affirms that they did no better than 18m. 
30s. Very well, — 18m. 30s. in practising at 
Worcester, and 19m. 45s. at Boston. What 
now becomes of the improbability that the 
Harvard crew made 18m. 9s., based on the 
near coincidence of their Worcester and 
Boston time in 1866, when in 1865, the year 
we are on, there was a difference, by his own 
confession of one minute and a quarter? 
Nor need the few remaining seconds trouble 
Mr. Blaikie, if he will only go out of his 
own experience. The Wards and the pres- 
ent Harvard crew rowed the Boston course 
on the fourth of July last, a most favorable 
day, in 19m. 19s and 19m. 45s., respectively. 
These two crews, a little later (the Wards, 
certainly, with no additional preparation), 
made at Worcester 17m. 40s. and 17m. 48s. 
— a difference of im. 39S. for the Ward, and 
im. 57s. for the Harvard crew. 

Yes, sir ! But the course was 15 seconds 
longer in 1865 than in 1864. The force of 
this objection, if it were true, would lie in 
the conciliating effect which it is supposed 
it would have on some of those who are 
convinced that the superiority of the Yale 
’65 crew over the ’64 is not correctly indi- 
cated by the difference between 19 m. 1 s. 
(their time in ’64) and 18 m. 42-J s. Fifteen 
seconds might propitiate them. Mr. Blaikie 
dwells on this point. He shows besides 
what 1 have just intimated, that if the course 


The Disputed 11 Time" of 1865. 


35 


were fifteen seconds longer, another happy 
coincidence between their time in the race 
and in private might be established. But 
the difficulty is, the objection will not stand. 
There was no such difference between the 
position of the stakes in ’64 and ’65 as he 
represents. He has, doubtless, confounded 
the proceedings at the stake of different 
years. In 1866, as he must recollect, the 
stake was brought down to accommodate 
the unusually long boat which his crew 
used. In 1867 it was carried up again about 
the distance which he specifies. Mr. Blaikie, 
however, supports his position by some 
details. In his letter to you, the stake was 
set, it seems, by some Yale representatives 
and one member of the Yale crew. In his 
late letter, it was set by two of the Yale 
crew. In his former letter, it was put down 
by the Yale representatives, against both 
Mr. Blaikie’s convictions and the protest of 
the members of the Yale crew, “That the 
course was five or six lengths too long,” 
combined. This was a most remarkable 
proceeding. In his late letter, the two 
members of the Yale crew were a unit, and 
the stake was set against Mr. Blaikie’s pro- 
test only. The gentleman is evidently much 
confused. The simple facts are, Mr. Scran- 
ton, ouHdow oar, on whose judgment great 
reliance was placed, from his experience in 
turning the ’64 stake, was selected, with Mr. 
Wood, as the Yale delegation to see the 
stake down precisely where it was in 1864. 
These gentlemen agreed then and affirm now 
that the position \)f the stake for the two 
years was identical. 

Again : Mr. Blaikie asks why no crew since 
’65 has, till this year, made so good time as 
18m. 40s. even ? He is well aware that only 
two of the 1865 crew rowed in 1866, and 
only one of the 1866 crew in 1867. If, now, 
he wishes to know, in disparagement of our 
claim that the ’65 crew made 17m. 42^s., 
why these two crews, differently constituted 
almost throughout, did not approach 17m. 
42-^s., let him press his question again. 
Once more : Mr. Blaikie wishes to know how 
it is he has heard that subsequent crews have 
beaten the ’65 crew’s private time? The 
crews of ’66 and ’67, to which he refers, rowed 
at Worcester, in public, in the neighborhood 
of nineteen minutes and a half, and he was 
present to see them. The lack of coinci- 
dence in the time of these crews and 
that of ’65 (whether her time be 17m. 42^-s. 
or 18^-m. 42-^-s.) in public, and which he saw, 
will perhaps excuse noticing further a ques- 
tion about their private time, prompted sole- 
ly by what he has heard. And, finally, two 
remarks which Mr. Blaikie has heard imputed 
to two of the Yale crew furnish him more 
capital with which to lengthen, without as- 
sisting, this controversy. One of these, 
attributed to Mr. Coffin, that gentleman has 
positively denied ; the other, ascribed to Mr. 
Scranton, he as emphatically disclaims. 

In support of the claim we have been de- 


fending, we have now something to offer from 
a different stand-point. Though it is at the 
risk of repeating some considerations offered 
by yourself, in your paper of Aug. 5, 1865, in 
commenting on the race, to the report of 
which you gave a conspicuous place, and in 
which you had previously manifested a lively 
interest, yet, sir, they are considerations as 
forcible now as then. 

The ’65 crew was a year older than the *64 
in hard, effective work. The men composing 
it trained and- worked faithfully during the 
fall of ’64, took severe and regular exercise 
through the winter, and underwent a thorough 
preparation for the race. Under this disci- 
pline the great improvement of the crew was 
strikingly exhibited. The general conviction 
of their superiority was also confirmed by 
their record. The general run of our prac- 
tice-time was a decided improvement on 
that of ’64 ; and from a careful comparison 
of our performances for the two years, 
we were convinced that, over three miles, the 
crew was from half a minute to a minute 
faster than during the previous year. One 
other element in the calculation of what our 
crew was prepared to do must not be slighted 
nor overlooked, — I mean the superiority of 
the ’65 over the ’64 boat. In 1864 our boat 
was Slow ; in 1865 she was unusually fast. 
It may lend support to this assertion to know 
that her model was followed in building the 
Ward’s four-oar, which is, perhaps, recog- 
nized as the fastest in this country. The 
amount of this superiority we endeavored to 
ascertain by experiments. Repeated trials in 
different states of the water satisfied us that 
the prediction of her builder, that she would 
prove one minute faster in three miles, was 
substantially realized. This element of ad- 
vantage I am not disposed to let pass un- 
weighed. It was ascertained and fixed, and 
above the influence of those causes which 
may come in to disappoint what are some- 
times a crew’s most reasonable expectations. 
At Worcester all was propitious. We were 
favored with those accessories which our 
confidence that we would beat eighteen min- 
utes — rather freely expressed, perhaps — pre- 
supposed : the day was fine, the water unex- 
ceptionable, and the men fit to row for their 
lives. Under these circumstances, the pre- 
tension that we beat our time the previous 
year only 19s., — that we rowed in only 18m. 
42+s., — permit me to say, in justice to the 
five men who rowed behind is simply absurd. 

Now, sir, for Mr. Maguire. This gentle- 
man was time-keeper. After Yale crossed 
the score he announced her time as 17m. 
42-i-s. This time the judges accepted, and 
soon afterwards both they and the referee 
separated, not aware that any other time was 
claimed. These facts are undisputed. 
Weeks later, Mr. Maguire, in a letter to Mr. 
Blaikie, which appeared in your paper of 
November 18, 1865, assures him that the 
time was 18m. 42|s., and gives his reasons 
in support of that position. As the reasons 


o 

0 


6 


Ur/V /?«// Harvard Boat-Racing. 


which he employs to convince Mr. Blaikie 
and the public are doubtless identical, let us 
see what his estimate of the popular intelli- 
gence is. Well, then, he says, that after an- 
nouncing the time as 17m. 42^-s., he was sat- 
isfied from a second count that he had made 
an error. Having made two counts, the first 
of which contradicted the second, he became 
convinced that the second one was correct ! 
This is excellent. And thereupon, he says, 
he announced it. Stimulated by the convic- 
tion that he had committed an error, in the 
midst of the judges and referee, he an- 
nounced his second count. And with what 
result? Why, sir, he was inaudible — per- 
fectly inaudible. This is the gentleman’s 
strong point — that he was inaudible ; and to 
its truth, and that he continued inaudible, it 
is but fair to confess the judges and referee 
unanimously testify. But at this stage, how 
full of expedients he must have been ! And 
leaving the judges’ boat, what an accession 
to those which he employed while in it, to 
satisfy the judges of his mistake, must have 
come to his command, in leaving the judges 
thereafter scrupulously alone ! One or two 
things, though, this gentleman did. He tells 
us he left his watch undisturbed. The meek- 
ness of this man is something amazing.^ He 
•did not disturb his watch ; his second an- 
nouncement of the time on the judges’ boat 
^disturbed nobody, and he thereafter left the 
judges and referee entirely undisturbed. 
And yet he complains that no one disturbs 
him ! He tells us that none of those who 
claim that Yale made 17m. 42IS. have been 
sufficiently particular about the truth to con- 
sult him. This complaint we will not am- 
plify. We are solemnly assured, however, 
that to its truth the gentleman is prepared to 
take oath. In addition to all this, the gen- 
tleman tells us that between the race and the 
next morning he showed his watch to some 
one else than the judges or referee. Now, 
sir, I imagine that the gentleman has sadly 
mistaken what will convert either yourself 
or the public to his position. I apprehend 
that the time we contend for rests on evi- 
dence, not to be shaken by all this mum- 
mery. 

In conclusion, I ask your attention to 
some of the affidavits which I have thought 
it well to collect in establishing 17m. 42-Js. 
as the correct time for Yale. It is unneces- 
sary to remind you that the dispute is one of 
minutes. That the seconds were 42 r-2, the 
time-keeper has uniformly maintained. 

Yours respectfully, 

Wilbur R. Bacon. 

New York, Aug. 31, 1868. 

City and County of New York , ss. .• J. Rus- 
sell Howell, being duly sworn, says : I was 

present at the University race in 1865, and 
stood on the shore, at the end of the starting 
line, for the express purpose of taking the 
time. I had a stop-watch of the Jules Jur- 
gensen make, and know that the time of the 


Yale crew was 17m. 45s. from the start to the 
last stroke, by that watch. There were sev- 
eral persons near me, whose time did not 
vary more than one or two seconds from that 
above. — J. Russell Howell, 24 Cortlandt 
street, N. Y. 

Sworn to before me, this 14th of August, 
1868. — Daniel Lord, Jr., Notary Public, 
City of New York. 

I know J. Russell Howell to be a gentle- 
man whose character for truth and veracity 
is unquestioned. — Chas. N. Herbert, Dis- 
trict Attorney for Middlesex County, N. J. 

City and County of New York , ss. : William 
W. Skiddy, of said city, being duly sworn, 
says : I attended the University race in 1865, 
and timed the Yale boat with great care. I 
stood on the shore just above the starting 
line, and noted the time of starting, and 
when the crew ceased rowing. I was very 
careful to check each minute as it passed, 
and made the time 17m. 46s. I am positive 
that the above time is essentially correct. — 
Wm. W. Skiddy, No. 9 Pine street, N. Y. 

Sworn to before me, this 28th of August, 
1868. — John F. Doyle, Notary Public, New 
York Co. 

From a personal acquaintance with Mr. 
Skiddy, I cheerfully testify to his veracity. — 
Geo. W. Quintard, No. 26 Broadway, N. Y. 

I, William Hillhouse, of New Haven, 
Conn., being duly sworn, do say, that I took 
the time of the Yale boat at the University 
race in 1865, and am positive that the min- 
utes were seventeen, and no more, I made 
no attempt to take the seconds, not having a 
stop-watch. My near position to the start- 
ing point strengthens my conviction that I 
took the time correctly. — Wm. Hillhouse. 

City and County of New Haven , ss., Aug. 
10, 1868. — Personally appeared Wm. Hill- 
house, who signed the above, to me well 
known, and made oath to the truth of the 
same, before me. — Chas. H. Fowler, No- 
tary Public. 

Mr. W. Hillhouse is known to me as a 
gentleman of undoubted veracity. — C. A. 
Lindsley, Prof, in Yale College. 

I was present at the regatta on Lake Ouin- 
sigamond in 1865, and stood on a point of 
land between the starting line and the grand 
stand, commanding a full view of the start- 
ing point. I took the time of the Yale crew 
as 17 minutes 40-odd seconds. I hereby sol- 
emnly swear that the above affidavit is true, 
to the best of my knowledge and belief. — 
A. S. Thomas. 

State of Rhode Island , Washington, ss., 
North Kingston, Aug. 18, 1868. — Personally 
appeared before me, signer of the within 
statement, and was duly engaged to same 
according to law. — Samuel Pierce, Notary 
Public. 


Its History in the Past. 


37 


I knew Aaron S. Thomas to be a man of 
unquestionable veracity. — John J. Rey- 
nolds, Ex-Lieut. -Gov. Rhode Island. 

Wickford, R. I., Aug. 18, 1868. 

On the 28th day of July, 1865, I was pres- 
ent at Lake Quinsigamond, and occupied a 
place on the grand stand. I carefully noted 
the time of the winning boat, the Yale, and 
immediately after the end of the race, before 
hearing any other announcement of time, I 
annnounced it “ as certainly within 17m. 
50s.” — J. F. Head, Surgeon in U. S. Army. 

State of Rhode Island , City of Newport , 
August 17, 1868. — Subscribed and sworn to 
before me this day. — Benjamin Marsh, No- 
tary Public. 

Dr. J. F. Head’s character for veracity is un- 
questioned, and I only certify to it here be- 
cause he requests me to do so, to meet the 


requirements of a formal paper. — Winfield 
S. Hancock, Maj.-Gen. U. S. A. 

Newport, R. I., August 17, 1868. 

City and County of New York , ss. : Charles 
N. Taintor, of said city, being duly sworn, 
says : I took the time of the Yale, in the 

University race in 1865, from the start till 
the last stroke, and made it 17m. 43s., and so 
announced it, previous to hearing the time 
taken in the judges’ boat. — Charles N. 
Taintor, Taintor Bros., 678 Broadway, N. Y. 

Sworn before me, this 12th day of August, 
1868. — George Gallagher, Notary Public. 

I am personally acquainted with Charles 
N. Taintor, and believe him to be wholly 
reliable in his statements of facts. — D. J. 
Sprague, of McKellopp, Sprague & Co., 37 
Park Row, N. Y. 


THE PAST AND FUTURE OF COLLEGE BOAT-RACING. 

»• ♦ 


[From the College Courant, July 1, 1871.] 

THE PAST. 

Good from Evil . — This year, for the first 
time in their history, the Harvard oarsmen 
take part in a college regatta wherein Yale 
does not participate. Their victory is of 
course a foregone conclusion, and whatever 
interest attaches to the race will arise from 
curiosity as to the comparative speed of the 
inferior crews, and the number of minutes by 
which the inevitably victorious one surpas- 
ses the best of them. But while we share in 
the very general regret that, owing to Harv- 
ard’s unaccountable actions, there is to be 
no regular University race this season, we 
are inclined to think that good may finally 
come from the evil, and that the unfortunate 
omission may ultimately result in placing 
the annual race upon a firmer footing than 
it has ever held before. In order to arrive 
at the best means for bringing this about, it 
will be necessary to understand the circum- 
stances under which the two colleges have 
contested for the championship in previous 
years. 

The First Race at Center Harbor , 1852. — As 

the author of “Four Years at Yale” — to 

whom we are indebted for the facts here 

offered — well remarks, “the history of the 

«/ 

aquatic contests between Yale and Harvard 
may be appropriately divided into two peri- 
ods : the first embracing the irregular trials 
of the nine years, 1852-60; the second, the 
seven University races of the successive 
years, 1864-70.” The town of Center Har- 
bor, on Lake Winnepiseogee, New Hamp- 
shire, was the place, and Tuesday, August 
3, 1852, the time, of the initial trial. It was 


between class or club boats existing in the 
two colleges, and not between the best gene- 
ral crews which each could produce. Yale 
sent up three crews, but one of them was 
ruled out, on account of pulling in a race- 
boat hired in New York. Harvard was with 
great difficulty persuaded to enter the race, 
and finally sent but a single boat, the Oneida, 
which won by two lengths, in a two-mile 
pull to the windward, up to the town from a 
stake-boat placed down the lake. The best 
of the Yale boats, which came in second, 
was the Halcyon, manned by the Shawmut 
crew of ’53. All the expenses of the regatta 
were borne by the hotel keeper who invited 
the crews to the lake. 

The Second Race , at Springfield , 1855. — The 
next meeting was on the Connecticut river, 
at Springfield, Saturday, July 21, 1855. Two 
weeks and a half before, July 4, the Yale 
Navy, in response to an invitation of the 
citizens, had held its annual regatta there, 
and, being disappointed in its expectation 
that Harvard would also take part, had sent 
the challenge which brought on the race. 
Yale entered the two 6-oared boats, Nereid 
and Nautilus ; Harvard, the Y. Y., 4 oars, 
32 feet, no coxswain, and Iris, 8 oars, 40 feet, 
with the same coxswain who steered the 
Oneida, three years before. Undine, 4 oars, 
was also present from Harvard, but was not 
entered. The course was three miles, half 
down the stream and back, and the actual 
times made were: Iris, 22m.; Y. Y., 22:47; 
Nereid, 24m., and Nautilus, 25m. ; which the 
handicap of ns. per oar, allowed the last 
three boats, would change to 22:3, 23:38, and 
24:38, respectively. In the evening, three of 
Y. Y. crew and three Boston oarsmen rowed 


38 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


over the course, in the Nereid, in 21:45, or 
in 15s. less than the winning 8-oared boat. 
The superiorit)^ of the Yale boat and of the 
Harvard oarsman were thus still further es- 
tablished. 

The Disaster at Springfield , 1858. — Three 
years afterward came the proposition from 
Harvard for the establishment of a “ union 
college regatta,” to occur at stated intervals, 
either annual or otherwise, and be shared in 
by as many colleges as possible. In sup- 
port of this plan, a meeting was held at New 
Haven, May 26, 1858, to which Harvard, 
Brown, Trinity and Yale each sent a dele- 
gate, while representatives of Dartmouth 
and Columbia were expected, but failed to 
appear. It was there voted : “ That the re- 
gatta of that year be held on Friday, July 
23, and that the place be Springfield, pro- 
vided sufficient pecuniary inducements be 
offered by the citizens thereof; that at each 
regatta the time and place of holding the 
next one be determined ; that none but aca- 
demical undergraduates (including the grad- 
uating class) take part therein ; that each 
college enter as many boats as it chose, and 
row them with or without coxswains ; that 
the course be three statute miles in length, 
and that an allowance of 12s. per oar be 
given the smaller boats ; that the position of 
the boats be determined by lot ; that each 
college entering appoint an umpire, and the 
umpires a referee ; and that a set of silk 
colors with suitable inscriptions be given 
the winning boat, — file cost of the same not 
to exceed $25, and to be met by the entrance 
fees required of the contesting boats.” The 
secretary was also instructed to invite other 
colleges to join the association, and take 
part in the coming and subsequent races. 
Six days before the time appointed for the 
race, Saturday night, July 17, 1858, while 
the Yale boat was taking a practice pull on 
the river at Springfield, a collision with 
another craft overturned it, and its stroke 
oarsman, George E. Dunham of ’59, sank to 
the bottom and was drowned. This melan- 
choly accident of course broke up the race, 
and the crews from Yale and Harvard — those 
from Brown and Trinity not having arrived 
— separated without making arrangements 
for any future contest. 

Organization of Union College Regatta , 
1859. — A meeting of delegates from the four 
colleges was held at Providence, February 
23, following, and the arrangements of the 
year before were again adopted. It was also 
voted that the next regatta be held on July 
22, following, either at Springfield or Worces- 
ter ; but doubtless the sad recollections of 
the disaster at the former place induced a 
change of locality, for Lake Ouinsigamond 
was ultimately selected, and all the Univer- 
sity races have since been held there. It lies 
some two miles from the city of Worcester, 
and is, in round numbers, 40 miles from 
Cambridge and 120 miles from New Haven. 
There, on the afternoon of Tuesday, July 


26, 1859, was held the first “ union college 
regatta ” ; four boats from three colleges 
rowing over the three-mile course, half down 
the lake and return. Harvard won in 19:18 ; 
followed by Yale in 20:18 ; by Avon, of Har- 
vard, in 21:13; and finally by Atalanta, of 
Brown University, in 24:40. One of the 
Yale crew, a Lit. editor of ’60, writes as fol- 
lows : “ After getting clear of the Avon, 

which, through accident doubtless, fouled 
us, we came in about half way between the 
two Harvard boats, having the double satis- 
faction of seeing the colors which the Idar- 
vards won, and winning for our betting 
friends the sums which they had staked 
against the Avon. Meanwhile the Harvard 
crew assured us that, in spite of our short 
practice and the fouling, we had come in 
nearer to them than any other boat ever did. 
But on Wednesday, July 27, was the final 
race for prizes offered by the city. Only the 
Harvard entered against us, and after draw- 
ing the inside, we took position at 22 minutes 
past 2. The Harvard took the lead, but 
about a mile up we closed with her and 
passed her, her bow fouling our starboard 
oars. Getting clear by a peculiar manoeuvre 
of the coxswain, we rounded the stake-boat 
first. The Harvard, however, turned in 
splendid style, and lapped us before we 
started on the home stretch. Coming up 
abreast of 11s, for more than a mile the race 
was stern and stern, sometimes one leading 
a few inches and then the other, while the 
10,000 spectators along the shore endeav- 
ored to add a degree of intensity to the ex- 
citement by cheers and shouts. But to see 
those red turbans beside us was all we could 
think of, and men shouted, ‘Pull, Yale!’ 

‘ Pull, Harvard !’ indifferently to us, for we 
hardly heard it. So down the lake we came, 
till a quarter of a mile from home, Harvard 
led a clear length, and our stroke, which 
had been, so they tell us, 48 to the minute, 
began to flag, but as the stroke oar called to 
us for final home spurt, we ‘responded’ 
(how, we cannot one of us tell), and pulled 
by Harvard, beating her a length and a half, 
19:14 to 19:16, — bettering her time of the day 
before by 4 seconds, and our own by 64 ! ” 
It should be noted that the terrific stroke, of 
forty-eight to sixty to the minute, kept up by 
the Yale crew in this race, was necessitated 
by the shortness of the oars, which, by a 
blunder of the builder, were only 10 1-2 feet 
long. Spite of this drawback, and spite of 
the foul, the time made was the fastest ever 
made in America to that date, and has never 
been equaled by a six-oared American crew, 
carrying an adult coxswain. The Gersh 
Banker of the Ward brothers, which next 
year made 18:37, was fully equipped, and car- 
ried a 40-pound boy for a coxswain. 

Second and Last Trial of the Same , i860. — 
This was Yale’s first aquatic triumph, and 
next year, under its inspiration, each one of 
the three lower classes challenged the cor- 
responding Harvard class to a trial of oars, 


Its History in the Past. 


39 


at the time of the “ union college regatta,” 
for which, of course, a University crew was 
also promised. The Harvard Juniors de- 
clined, while the two lower classes accepted 
the challenge. In the Freshman race, 
though the Glyuna of Yale was a much bet- 
ter boat than the Thetis of Harvard, the lat- 
ter won, in 19:40 to the former’s 20:20. In 
the Sophomore race, Harvard (Haidee) again 
won, in 20:17 ; — the Thulia of Yale giving 
up, just after turning the stake-boat, on ac- 
count of the sudden illness of one of its 
crew. “ Next came the race of the day. A 
rope had been stretched across the foot of 
the lake, and attached to it, at regular inter- 
vals, were small blocks of wood, against 
which the stern of every boat was to be 
placed before the start was made. The Har- 
vard, the Yale, and the Brown had entered 
the list, and at the word ‘ Give way !’ all got 
off in fine style. The Harvard, with a tre- 
mendous leap, shot ahead of the other two ; 
the Yale pressed close after, while the Brown 
at once fell behind.” These relative posi- 
tions were kept to the end, the time being 
18:53, I 9 : 5 > and 21:15. The Brunonians, 
with a boat that, though built specially for 
the occasion, was poor and almost feather 
weight, “ showed their pluck by entering 
the race, and their judgment by backing the 
Harvard.” 

The Seven University Races , 1864-70. — 
This was the last ever heard of the “ union 
college regatta,” — the single outside college 
that had been induced to take part in it hav- 
ing been twice hopelessly defeated, — and for 
the next three years there were no college 
races of any sort. The breaking out of the 
war probably had considerable to do with the 
interruption, and the vote of the Yale cor- 
poration, in i860, that in future no Yale 
crew should engage in any outside races 
during term time, perhaps contributed to 
the same result. But in 1864 Yale organ- 
ized a crew and sent a challenge up to Har- 
vard, and the first regular University race 
was rowed. The seven annual races, count- 
ing from then to 1870, have resembled each 
other in the following respects : The course 
has been at Lake Quinsigamond, Worces- 
ter, one mile and a half down the lake, about 
a single turning stake, and back to the 
starting point — three miles in all ; the time 
has been a Friday afternoon in July, the day 
after the Yale Commencement ; the race has 
been the last thing of the day, being pre- 
ceded by one or two “citizens’ regattas” 
between crews from Worcester and else- 
where, and by the freshman or scientific race, 
if there was any ; the boats have been six- 
oared shells, without coxswains, rowed by 
academical undergraduates, including mem- 
bers of the graduating class ; the emblems 
of victory have been a pair of silken Hags, 
one of blue, inscribed with the words, 
“College Regatta, Champion, University, 
Worcester,” and the date — the other, an 
American ensign, on the six white stripes of 


which the names of the victorious oarsmen 
were afterwards inscribed ; the defeated 
party of one year has been the challenging 
party of the next year, and the challenged 
party has had the right of naming the place ; 
each crew has appointed its judges and 
time-keepers, and the judges have chosen 
the referee ; the cost of the flags has some- 
times been borne equally by the competing 
crews, and sometimes by the citizens of 
Worcester, who have also presented gold 
medals to the winners of two or three of the 
races ; the choice of position has been de- 
cided by chance, Yale drawing the inside in 
the first four races, and Harvard in the last 
three. The victor in the first two races was 
Yale ; in the last five, Harvard, — though in 
the final one the flag was won on the claim 
of a foul, — and the times made were as fol- 
lows, Yale’s being first noted: 1864, July 
29, 19:1 to 19:57; 1865, July 28, 17:42 1-2 to 
18:9; 1866, July 27, 19:10 to 18:43; 1867, 
July 19, 19:25 1-2 to 18:13; 1868, July 24, 
18:38 1-2 to 17:48 1-2 ; 1869, July 23, 18:1 1 to 
18:2 ; 1870, July 22, 18:45 to 20:30. 

Seven Minor Races of the “ Second Pe- 
riods 1864-70. — During this “second pe- 
riod ” of seven years, seven other races were 
rowed between the two colleges, as follows, 
Yale’s time being first noted : 1864, July 29, 
Sophomores of ’66, 20:15 to 19:5 ; 1865, July 
29, race for “ citizens’ prize ” of $200, be- 
tween the two University crews (who in the 
University race of the day before had made 
17:421-2 to 18:9), 19:5 to 19:20; 1866, July 
27, Scientifics, 19:38 to 18:54; 1867, July 19, 
Freshmen of ’70, 19:38 to 20:6 ; 1869, July 
23, Freshmen of ’72, 19:58 1-2 to 19:30; 1870, 
July 22, Freshmen of ’73, 19:45 to 20; 1870, 
June 22, Scientifics, 20:10 to 22:33 I-2 - This 
last race was rowed at Lake Saltonstall, 
near New Haven, and the Harvard crew 
were badly demoralized by hard travel and 
want of sleep. The other races were rowed 
at Quinsigamond. In the 1864 Sophomore 
race, one of the Yale crew gave out at the 
turning stake. The difference in the 
“times” of the two races of the University 
crews of ’65, is explained by the change in 
weather, which on the first day was perfectly 
calm, and on the second was very rough and 
windy. In the 1870 Freshman race, the flags 
were won by the crew from Brown Univer- 
sity, in 19:21. In 1868, the Yale Sophomores 
of ’70 and Freshmen of ’71, and in 1871, the 
Yale Freshmen of ’74, rejected challenges 
from the corresponding clubs of Harvard. 

Summary of the Twenty- One Races. — Re- 
ducing what has been said to a summary, it 
appears that there have been in all twenty- 
one distinct races between Yale and Har- 
vard, — taking place in eleven of the nine- 
teen years between 1852 and 1870, — and that 
seven of them have been won by Yale and 
fourteen by Harvard. The list is made up 
as follows : Two club races, 1852 and 1855, 
both won by Harvard ; two “ union college 
regattas,” 1859 and i860, in both of which the 


40 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing, 

o 


order was Harvard, Yale, ( longo interuallo ) 
Brown; two “citizens’ regattas,” 1859 an d 
1865, between the University crews, both 
won by Yale ; two Sophomore races, ’62 in 
i860, and ’66 in 1864, both won by Harvard ; 
four Freshman races, ’63 in i860, ’70 in 1867, 
’72 in 1869, and ’73 in 1870, two won by Yale 
and two by Harvard ; two Scientific races, 
1866 and 1870, the first won by Harvard — 
the second by Yale; and finally, seven Uni- 
versity races, 1864-70, the first two won by 
Yale, the last five by Harvard. 

How They Have Been Managed. — It is seen, 
therefore, that the boating spirit and the in- 
terest in these races have constantly in- 
creased, and have been most intense and 
wide-spread in the latest years ; but that, 
spite of the enlarged importance of the pas- 
time, and its nearer approach to a strictly 
scientific basis, it has been under a rather 
ill-defined and traditional management. The 
first two races, of 1852 and 1855, were hap- 
hazard, off-hand trials between various club 
crews of the two colleges, using various 
sorts of barges, carrying various numbers of 
oars. The next two, of 1859 an d T 86o, were 
an improvement upon these, and were under 
a set of formal regulations. The boats were 
six-oared shells, built for the occasion, and 
manned by the best representative oarsmen 
of the two colleges. Still, in the former race 
Harvard entered a second boat, and in the 
latter race rowed without a coxswain, though 
Yale carried one; while a third contestant, 
Brown, appeared on both occasions. The 
seven University races, 1864-70, and the 
seven class or special races in connection 
with them, have all been under a sort of tra- 
ditional management, though pretending to 
pay a kind of shadowy obedience to the 
rules of the convention of 1859. 

Chance for Opening a New Period. — Strictly, 
the latter, under the changed circumstances 
of the case, have long been obsolete. Had 
the fact been formerly recognized by the 
adoption of definite “ rules for the University 
race” the hiatus of this year would probably 
never have occurred ; but, as it has occurred, 
if the good opportunity thereby offered for 
the adoption of such rules be taken advan- 
tage of, the event may in time be considered 
a fortunate one for all concerned. Admitting 
— what many, for some years past, have 
claimed — that a reorganization and “ new 
departure ” were inevitable, it would certainly 
seem best that the same be radical and com- 
plete, when made ; and the breaking off' of 
this year’s race leaves the way clear for the 
definite commencement of a new, third, 
“ period ” in boating matters. 

How Yale's Desire for a Straight Race grew 
into a Demand. — Ever since the defeat of 
their University crew in 1866, the Yale men 
have desired that Worcester should be aban- 
doned, in favor of some course where a 
“ straightaway,” three-mile race would be 
possible, without turning stakes of any sort. 
At first they were inclined to favor the old 


course at Springfield, but latterly the river at 
New London has seemed to be the most de- 
sirable place for a straight pull; and in the 
spring of 1870 a committee induced some 
Harvard representatives to meet them there 
and inspect its advantages. But Harvard, 
though admitting that much could be said in 
favor of a straight race at New London, in- 
sisted, as in the three previous years, upon 
exercising its “ right as champion,” to name 
the old doubled mile and-a-half course on 
the lake at Worcester. But after the foul- 
ings and brow-beatings and knock-downs 
and contradictory “ decisions,” which attend- 
ed the races of 1870, it became so evident 
that Yale oarsmen could never more hope 
for fair play or fair treatment at Worcester, 
that even the newspapers called upon them 
never to row there again, and the members 
of the crew pledged one another never to row 
there again, and the college voted unani- 
mouslv that they never should row there 
again, come what would. Then came the 
challenge of December 10, for “a 6 oared, 
3-mile, straight race, on any course which 
Harvard might select ;” and finally the letter 
of May 17, rejecting it, but admitting its jus- 
tice by offering to “ row a three-mile-straight 
race with Yale in the general regatta of 
American colleges,” — which had in the mean- 
time been instituted by Harvard. And at 
last, — when the fact was realized that Yale 
was not to be bullied into the general regat- 
ta, and that without its presence the “grand 
national boat race” was likely to be little else 
than a grand fizzle, and that the odium of 
breaking up the usual University race would 
be likely to fall on the proper shoulders, — 
came Harvard’s sudden whirl-about, and 
change of base, and offer to row Yale a fair 
and square race, at any time and place and 
under any possible conditions that might be 
agreeable. Though this eleventh-hour re- 
pentance came too late to be available this 
year, we accept it as a hopeful sign of the 
future ; and shall show, next week, how that 
it may be made useful in paving the way for 
the “ new departure,” which we then propose 
to mark out at length 


[From the College Courant, July 8.] 

THE FUTURE. 

Outline of the Previous Remarks . — Last 
week, in rehearsing at length the history of 
past aquatic contests, we showed that in 
1852 and 1855 the races were improvised, 
off-hand affairs, between miscellaneous club- 
boats ; that in 1859 an d i860, under the 
formal rules of a “ union college regatta,” a 
third college (Brown) entered, only to be 
hopelessly defeated ; that from 1864 to 1870 
seven University races — and in connection 
with them a like number of class races — 
were rowed, over a doubled, mile-and-a-half- 
and-turn-about course, at Worcester, under 
a sort of traditional obedience to the rules 
adopted in 1859 *> that ever since the defeat 


Ls n * d > 


Its Prospects in the Future. 


41 


of 1866 Yale has desired a “ straight-away ” 
race, and was led by the events of 1870 to 
change this desire to a command ; that 
Harvard admitted the justice of the demand 
by arranging a general college regatta over 
a straight course, but rejected Yale’s chal- 
lenge with the idea of thus forcing Yale into 
that regatta ; that, when Yale had refused to 
enter it, and had disbanded its crew, Har- 
vard reconsidered its former action, and 
accepted the challenge without reservation ; 
and finally, that this repentance, though 
coming too late to be of avail this year, 
offered good reason for believing that the 
long inevitable “ new departure ” could now 
be made, and the University race, from 1S72 
onwards, be established as a permanent 
institution. 

The Two Conditions of a Successf ul Race. 
— In order to place the University race upon 
a successful basis, and make it approach in 
some slight way to a national spectacle, 
which many people in all stations of life 
will take pains to witness, and which nearly 
everybody will have an interest in, — in 
order, that is, that it may have some little 
analogy to the University race in England, 
two conditions are indispensable. The one 
is that the course should be such as to afford 
the contestants an opportunity for doing 
their best, without danger of collisions ; the 
other is that the locality should be easy of 
approach, and the course itself be imme- 
diately accessible throughout its whole 
extent, allowing the spectators on shore to 
follow alongside the boats from the start to 
the finish, and witness from close quarters 
the progress of the entire race. 

The Old Course at Worcester a Bad One . — 
Lake Quinsigamond at Worcester fulfils 
neither of these conditions. In the first 
place, the rowers cannot do their best, 
because the course is a doubled one, and 
turning about consumes many seconds of 
time ; and if both boats round a single stake 
— which, as a matter of fact, has been the 
invariable practice hitherto — the choice of 
the “ inside ” position is worth at least five 
seconds of time ; that is to say, the result of 
the race depends largely upon chance and 
upon skill in making the turn, instead of 
upon good rowing alone. But the course, 
short as it is, is not a straight one, for the 
stake-boat cannot be seen from the starting- 
point, and a boat which hugs the shore at all 
in its endeavors to follow a straight line is 
likely to suffer from shallow water. Foul- 
ings of some sort have occurred — more than 
once, in several instances — in 5 out of the 18 
races which the two colleges have contested 
upon this lake. But, in the second place, as 
regards the spectators, the locality is difficult 
of approach, and the course is only at two 
or three points accessible. Most of the 
visitors must approach the town either by 
way of Springfield on the west or Boston on 
the east; and Yale graduates in New York 
— which city contains a very large number of 


them, and of late years an increasing num- 
ber of Harvard men also — must give up the 
better part of two days’ time, if they desire 
to attend the race. The lake, being two or 
three miles from the railway station in the 
city, must be approached by private convey- 
ance, at great expense of money ; or by 
public omnibus, at great expense of cleanli- 
ness and comfort ; or by special railway 
trains, which leave the excursionist at the 
top of a high hill, half a mile from the scene 
of excitement, whither he must pick his way 
on foot, over stony pastures and sandy 
potato fields. Reaching the lake at last, he 
can sit with the rabble upon the dusty cause- 
way, where the start and finish can be 
viewed at close quarters, and the first and 
last part of the race be witnessed at a dis- 
tance ; or he can, on payment of fifty cents, 
go up to the “grand stand” on “regatta 
point,” 600 feet further ahead, and stand 
there — if particularly lucky, sit there — among 
the collegians, and the “ beauty and fashion” 
of the city ; or he can wend his way through 
the woody swamps to some projecting point 
still further up the lake ; or he can paddle 
about in a scow, or ride in the little side- 
wheel steamer, in the intervals between the 
races. But the return is always made to the 
city too late for departure on the early 
evening trains, so that the visitor is obliged 
to content himself with a “ Worcester sup- 
per,” and to wait till ten o’clock before 
starting off on his night ride homeward, — 
supposing, of course, that he prefers this to 
the more disagreeable alternative of a night’s 
lodging at the Bay State House. 

The Neiv Course above Springfield an Unde- 
sirable One. — The “ Ingleside ” course on the 
Connecticut river, where the “grand national 
college regatta” of the “rowing association 
of American colleges” is to be held on 
July 21 (in which regatta the contestants will 
be crews from Harvard and Brown, and pos- 
sibly also from the polytechnic institute at 
Troy and the agricultural college at Am- 
herst), is in one of the required conditions 
superior, and in the other inferior, to the 
course on Quinsigamond lake. It necessi- 
tates no turning about of the boats, but 
allows a down-stream, three-mile race. The 
course, however, though “ straightaway,” is 
not straight, — as, two miles from the starting 
point, the river bends around to the east, — 
and it is practically not much broader than 
the one at Worcester, on account of shallows 
and sand-bars. But, so far as facilities for 
witnessing the race are concerned, a worse 
course could not easily have been chosen. 
At no point does the railway on the east side 
come within sight of it, and at only one 
point — for about a quarter of a mile, in the 
vicinity of the Ingleside hotel — does the 
carriage road on the west side approach 
within 400 feet of the river. The hotel itself 
stands back about 1000 feet from the stream, 
on the brow of a high hill, and in full view 
of about four miles of the river’s course. 


6 


42 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing . 


From the verandas and balconies of the 
hotel, and from the summit of the hill, 
therefore, the entire race could be witnessed ; 
but the contestants would be reduced to 
microscopic proportions, and a boat-race 
sighted at long range, even with the aid of a 
telescope, is not a particularly exciting spec- 
tacle. The start would be made a little 
below Willimansett, — which is the second 
railway station north of Springfield, and is 
about a mile above Ingleside itself, — and 
would end a few hundred feet above Chico- 
pee station, the first one north of Spring- 
field. A ferryboat, worked with wires, 
crosses the water near the starting, and a 
bridge, with open footpath and inner drive- 
way, crosses it near the finishing point of the 
race. Excursion trains would leave from 
Springfield, stopping at the bridge below 
and the ferry above Ingleside, and those 
who did not ride out to the hotel, in omnibus 
or private conveyance hired for the occasion, 
would have to adopt one of two alternatives : 
they could go up on the train to the second 
station, there cross on the ferry, witness the 
start from the river’s bank, and then scram- 
ble up to the top of the hill, and watch the 
rest of the race ; or they could seat them- 
selves on the Chicopee bridge, and see the 
final mile of the race, which would come to 
its end a few hundred feet above them. 
Even with the aid of a very swift horse, it 
would not be possible for a person who wit- 
nessed the start at Ingleside to drive down 
in season to witness the finish near the 
Chicopee bridge, aside from the fact that for 
almost his entire drive he would be out of 
sight of the boats ; and the scheme of fol- 
lowing up the race with steam tugs, carry- 
ing several hundred spectators, would be 
rendered impracticable, from the fact that no 
such boats are ever used so far inland, and 
that none could be built or brought there 
without great expense. We are induced to 
believe, also, that the water would be too 
shallow for boats of this class, though the 
miniature tugs owned by the hotel, which 
would be used to accommodate the judges 
and reporters in following the race along, 
seem to ply about in the vicinity without 
much difficulty. 

The Regular Springfield Course a Good One . — 
We next come to the old course at Spring- 
field, where so many successful aquatic con- 
tests have occurred, where the second college 
race between Yale and Harvard was rowed, 
July 21, 1855, and where we have no doubt 
that all the races since then would have 
taken place except for the drowning of 
Yale’s bow-oar in 1858, which disaster first 
induced the collegians to go to Worcester. 
In both the conditions which we are con- 
sidering, it evidently surpasses the proposed 
course at Ingleside, and consequently is 
incomparably superior to the old one at 
Quinsigamond lake. At Springfield the 
river is broader and deeper than six miles 
above, and the bend which it makes to the 


west, a mile and a half below the bridge, 
where the boats would probably start, is 
hardly more important than the bend made 
to the east by the Ingleside course. The 
city is 100 miles from Boston, 140 miles 
from New York, and 60 miles from New 
Haven, and a dozen railway trains from 
each of the four points of the compass arrive 
at and depart from it daily. Without walk- 
ing more than 100 rods from the station, the 
visitor could place himself upon the bridge, 
or “grand stand” near by, and witness at 
close quarters the start, and from a distance 
the first half of the race. Otherwise, he 
could betake himself, — by omnibus, private 
carriage, or on foot, — to “ the bend,” where 
the highway meets the river, and there, either 
at the water’s edge, or on the high hills 
which rise near by, could witness from a 
distance the entire race. On the opposite 
(west) bank, for the last half mile, a carriage 
road runs alongside the water; though the 
circumstance would be of advantage only to 
the country people dwelling in the vicinity. 
But the railway follows close beside the 
water for more than two miles of the course, 
and trains of open cars could be run, start- 
ing with the boats at the bridge, and stopping 
at the point where the track diverges from 
the river, in order to let the crowd leap off' 
and rush along through the fields beside the 
bank, for the last half mile or so of the race. 
This would be no doubt the best and most 
exciting way of enjoying the spectacle, and 
would create a more intense interest and 
enthusiasm than has attended any previous 
race. If, however, the crews should decide 
to row up stream, and finish at the bridge, 
— where an immense concourse would be 
assembled, on account of the little trouble 
with which the place could be reached, — and 
the train should run as before, its hundreds 
of passengers could see at close quarters all 
but the least important part of the race, and 
could be on hand to join the waiting multi- 
tude in rending the air with shouts, at the 
close of the contest. The city, furthermore, 
has some excellent hotels and restaurants ; 
and the “ Springfield Club ” is a wide-awake 
organization, made up of the leading young 
men in the city, and having for one of its chief 
objects the encouragement of athletic sports. 

The New London Course the Best . — But the 
course which best fulfills the two conditions 
for a successful University race is un- 
doubtedly that on the Thames river at New 
London. Straight as an arrow, for more 
than three miles ; with a width at its nar- 
rowest place of a quarter of a mile, between 
six-foot soundings ; having a railroad close 
beside for its entire length on the western 
shore; and a carriage road leading over the 
Groton hills on the eastern one ; — the course 
on the Thames offers every advantage that 
could well be asked for, either by the rowers 
or the spectators. The tides there rise and 
fall but two and a half feet, the current runs 
at a rate of less than a mile an hour, and 


Its Prospects in the Future. 


43 


there is scarcely more danger from eddies or 
whirlpools than on Lake Quinsigamond 
itself. The locality is about ioo miles from 
Boston, 120 from New York, 50 from New 
Haven, 60 from Providence and 90 from 
Amherst, and is approached by railways 
from the north, east and west, and by two 
lines of steamers from New York. If 
thought advisable, a fleet of steam tugs 
could be easily collected, to follow after the 
competing boats, and afford several thousand 
people an opportunity of watching them at a 
little closer quarters than would be possible 
for the multitude on the trains moving along 
the shore. In the bays and indentations of 
the shore, also, could be anchored the long 
lines of yachts and sail boats which would be 
attracted to the spectacle from New Haven, 
New York and other places along the coast. 
As the current is too sluggish to be of any 
importance, the course would no doubt be 
an up-stream one, finishing at Winthrop’s 
Point, where a band of music could be 
stationed, and a “ grand stand ” erected, 
from which those who perferred a comfort- 
able seat to a stand-up ride on boat or rail- 
car, could watch the approaching boats from 
the start, three miles away, to the finish, 
close by, — provided their eyes or telescopes 
were equal to the occasion. Here, too, at 
the final exciting moment, the immense 
crowds from the trains and boats, with the 
stationary watchers on shore, would all be 
rallied together, to welcome the victors with 
a more enthusiastic burst of applause than 
has ever yet gone up to the skies on any 
similar occasion in America. 

The Question of Hotels . — In the face of all 
these considerations, which must count over- 
whelmingly in its favor, the only objections 
ever advanced against New London, are the 
facts that it is a “ sleeplv old town,” whose 
citizens are entirely devoid of enterprise, and 
that it possesses no hotels entitled to be 
called first-class. Passing by the first as a 
thing not yet decisively proved, we propose 
to show that the second objection is in 
reality one the strongest of the minor argu- 
ments that can be advanced in favor of mak- 
ing the city the scene of the University race. 
College racing has been quite long enough 
conducted in subserviency to the interests of 
hotel keepers, and we insist that it is high 
time for the parties concerned to put an end 
to it. The original race of 1852 was an 
avowed advertisement for mine host at 
Center Harbor, who agreed to pay all the 
expenses of the contestants, in consideration 
of the extra profits to be derived from the 
additional visitors whom their three days’ 
presence would attract to his hostelry; and 
the most reasonable explanation of the 
strange choice made by the “ rowing associa- 
tion of American colleges” (of the unknown 
and unapproachable Ingleside course, in- 
stead of the reputable and accessible course 
at Springfield), for the “grand national 
college regatta” of 1871, seems to lie in the 


desire that the enterprising owner of a very 
excellent country hotel should be presented 
with a sort of complimentary testimonial as a 
reward for previous success in entertain- 
ing his guests. It is also to be 1 noted that — 
as the “Springfield Club,” after having 
offered prizes “valued at” $1100 for the 
“grand national college regatta” (between 
Harvard and Brown), have thought best to 
back up the enterprise by offering $550 in 
money and thereby instituting a regatta 
between professional oarsmen of Boston 
and New York, upon the previous day; and 
as the champion race between the Atalantas 
(who, on Monday next, row on Lake Salton- 
stall against the Yale Sophomores of ’73) 
and the Harvards is appointed for the 1 8th, 
— the hotel keepers of the city and its 
suburbs are evidently hoping, by a four days’ 
detention of many of the visitors, to reap a 
rich harvest from “the races.” As for Wor- 
cester, the plan adopted for the first four 
years was to have a second day given up to 
a “citizens’ regatta,” in which the college 
crews of the day before could also contest 
and attempt to gain back or add to their 
laurels ; and from 1866 onwards to have the 
“citizens’ races” precede those of the col- 
leges and delay the latter to so late an hour 
that the spectators would be unable to get 
away from Worcester on the early evening 
trains. 

No Necessity of “ Making a Night of It .” — 
Now, we cry out against this sort of imposi- 
tion being submitted to any longer, and 
most earnestly call upon the college men, at 
the very outset of the “ new departure,” to 
rid themselves completely of the traditional 
idea that, for the complete enjoyment of a 
University race, a night must be spent in 
the locality where it is rowed. The time of 
holding “regatta balls,” with their absurd if 
not indecent liummery ; of making night 
hideous by lamp smashing, yelling and 
rowdyism; of “getting even” with extor- 
tionate hotel keepers, by breaking their win- 
dows, crockery and furniture, and sacking 
their wine closets : of indicating the “ mutual 
good feeling ” between victor and van- 
quished, by a general drunken orgy, lasting 
till day-break, — all this, as we trust, has 
gone by forever. Henceforth, the contes- 
tants and the spectators who are their 
partisans must “ mean business ” simply — 
the former going in to win and the latter to 
see them do it. Henceforth, it ought to be 
possible for New York and Boston, and 
any nearer locality, to witness the race, with 
the expenditure of but a single day in time, 
and of nothing whatever in money upon the 
I local landlords. Henceforth, the spectacle 
! should be over so early that the setting in of 
darkness would find upon the scene of it no 
more than a hundred of the thousands 
drawn there by its attractions. Henceforth, 
New London — the dead old town of sleepy 
and unenterprising citizens — New London 
on the Thames, 14 miles from Norwich, 50 


44 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


from New Haven, 60 from Providence, — 
three cities with good hotels galore, — should 
be the scene of the University race ! 

Laying out an Immovable Course. — Suppo- 
sing the locality agreed upon and a conven- 
tion of Yale and Harvard boatmen assem- 
bled there, to decide upon the arrangements 
for establishing a permanent annual Uni- 
versity race, we would respectfully beg leave 
to suggest to them the following considera- 
tions : As the length of a “ three mile course ” 
is apt to vary, not only in different localities 
but in the same locality where the boundary 
lines are indicated only by buoys anchored 
in the water, the comparison of “times” 
made on different courses, or in different 
years on the same course, — not even taking 
into consideration the difference of wind or 
weather, — is of little avail. Hence, to se- 
cure accuracy and stability in the new course, 
it should be laid out carefully by a reliable 
surveyor, and defined by immovable bounds 
on the shore. If granite posts, eight or ten 
inches square and three or four feet high, 
were planted close beside the shore on each 
side of the river, the positions of buoys 
would be invariable. Posts should be set 
in this way to mark every mile up to three 
(and perhaps up to six, in anticipation of 
future changes in racing). 

The Champion Flags. — The champion dag 
should be a large affair of silk (perhaps the 
two college colors of red and blue might be 
tastefully combined in it) ; intended to serve 
for ten years, or perhaps in the first case for 
eight years, in order to end an even decade ; 
inscribed on one side: “ Harvard-Yale Uni- 
versity Race — Three Miles, Straight Course — 
Thames River, New London, 1872-79; and 
on the other; “Record of Championship” 
and “ I. 1872,” “ II. 1873,” etc., in successive 
lines, down to “ VIII. 1S79,” at the bottom, — 
after each race the victorious college to fill 
out the blank line of that year, by inscribing 
its name, the date, and the “ times ” of the two 
boats. It could be agreed upon in advance 
that at the end of the eighth race either the dag 
should become the property of the last win- 
ner, or of the winner of the majority of the 
eight races, or should be joined with the 
similar dag of the second decade, 1880-89, 
and share its fortunes, by being kept each 
year in the hands of the victorious party, as 
before. We ourselves think the latter the 
preferable plan. But besides this champion 
dag there should be each year presented to 
the winning crew a silken American ensign, 
on whose six white stripes their names could 
be afterwards inscribed, with the date and 
“times” made. This alone, would serve 
as a permanent trophy. 

The Time of the Race fixed without Chal- 
lenges. — So long as the faculty refuse to allow 
the Yale men to enter a race of this sort in 
term time, the day after the Commencement 
of that college will be the earliest oppor- 
tunity for rowing it ; and as the Harvard 
term ends a fortnight earlier, and its crew 


cannot reasonably be asked to sacrifice a 
larger portion of their vacation, that day 
(the second Friday in July) might as well be 
settled upon as the time of the trial. Eight 
weeks beforehand, if agreed in the conven- 
tion, each college should notify the other of 
its definite intention to enter the contest ; 
and four weeks beforehand, the representa- 
tives of both crews should meet together 
and perfect the final arrangements therefor, 
appoint the two judges, who should choose 
the referee, and so on. In this way the 
necessity of sending challenges would be 
dispensed with altogether. In case one col- 
lege notified the other that it would not 
enter, that other should be entitled to the 
champion dags of the year, simply by row- 
ing over the course on the appointed day. 
Cyphers should then be inscribed on the 
“ record of championship,” in place of the 
“time” of the missing boat. Should neither 
party row over the course, a double stripe of 
gilt might be made to fill the “ record ” blank 
of that year, while the dag itself should be 
kept by the last ) r ear’s victor. Were the 
necessity of a night’s stay away from New 
Haven avoided, it is possible that the Yale 
faculty might ultimately allow the race to be 
rowed in term time. 

College Races Encouraged ; None Others Al- 
lowed. — Efforts should be made to secure, 
every year, one or two class or special races 
between the two colleges, in 6-oared shells, 
and also races in single or double wherries, 
between representative oarsmen picked from 
some special class or department, or from 
the university as a whole, — two boats only 
being allowed in any single race. Every 
inducement should also be offered to per- 
suade crews of other colleges to row races 
with one another at this same time and place, 
under such conditions as any pair of them 
might agree upon. But as for amateur crews, 
and professional oarsmen, and “ citizens’ re- 
gattas ” of any sort, — no such nonsense 
should be for a moment tolerated. The 
races should be rowed exclusively by col- 
lege men, should be confined to a single 
day, beginning in the forenoon if necessary, 
and should end up at not later than four in 
the afternoon with the University race be- 
tween Harvard and Yale. 

Money Wanted to Pay Expenses , Not as 
Prizes for the Winners. — No winning boat 
should be allowed to receive any other prize 
than the the champion dag. The races be- 
ing rowed for glory simply, cups, medals 
and plate, “valued at” a certain amount, 
as well as money itself, should be resolutely 
ruled out. The convention should insist 
that whatever “encouragement” might be 
offered by the citizens should be in the form 
of hard cash, divided equally between the 
two crews in any given race, and devoted 
by them to defraying in part their really 
enormous expenses. Supposing that New 
London should offer $1,000 for the University 
crews, Yale and Harvard, each receiving 


Its Prospects in the Future. 


45 


half of it, might be enabled to pay something 
like a third of their expenses in the race. 
Likewise the Freshmen or any other class 
crew, or wherry oarsmen in the two colleges, 
might ask the New London people in ad- 
vance exactly how much ‘•encouragement” 
they would be willing to offer them in any 
given year. So, too, Brown and Amherst, 
or any other pair of colleges, might send in 
proposals asking how much would be offered 
them; and, from the answer given, decide 
whether or not they could afford to make up 
a race. The point that we insist upon is, 
that each pair of contesting crews should 
join together in equally meeting the gen- 
eral expenses, of flags, etc., and should in- 
dividually pay every penny of its own spe- 
cial debts, be they great or small ; and that 
if the citizens wish to aid in the sport they 
should give to each party an equal and defi- 
nite amount of money, the larger the better, 
regardless of the final result of the race. 
If the citizens raise no money by subscrip- 
tion for the purpose, they ought at least to 
surrender the profits derived from the excur- 
sion trains and tug-boats which follow up 
the race ; and if they will not do this, the 
two University crews ought to appoint an 
agent to manage the matter, and themselves 
distribute the proceeds in fair proportion 
among the competing boats. We have only 
to say, touching the rules to be adopted by 
the convention in regard to “starting” and 
“ fouling,” that though it would seem that 
the latter misfortune, on the proposed course, 
were well nigh impossible^ yet provision 
should be made against giving the race to 
any boat which comes in second, so long as 
the first, when under charge of foul, is will- 
ing to row the race over again. 

Boat Racing in the Smaller Colleges . — It 
will be observed that we have thus far in our 
remarks ignored, for the most part, the 
smaller colleges ; and as the events of the 
past few months have tended to throw a good 
deal of dust in the popular eye, whenever 
it has been turned towards this matter, we 
suppose it is best, before concluding, to ex- 
plain at length our reasons for doing so. 
First, then, we may say that boat racing is 
a plant of slow growth ; a very elaborately 
formed and very expensively nurtured plant ; 
the superlative achievement, the bright con- 
summate flower of college athletic sports. 
After existing for about thirty years at Yale 
and Harvard, it has at last — though only re- 
cently — become well systematized, and made 
to approximate somewhat closely to a scien- ' 
tific basis. With six hundred or more mem- 
bers in its boat club, each of the two colleges 
finds all its energies required for the annual 
production of a creditable University crew 
of six, and has no extra material to spare 
for class or special races after Freshman 
year. Now, when Harvard and Yale — with 
more men and money, with better facilities 
and conveniences, and with over a quarter of 
a century’s experience, on their side — are 


put to their trumps in this way, what rea- 
sonable hope can the smaller colleges, 
whose boating began or was revived at the 
time of the International race, have of suc- 
cessfully competing with them? It is be- 
cause we desire to increase rather than to 
diminish their aquatic enthusiasm, that we 
would impress upon them the hopelessness 
of contending directly with the two leading 
colleges. We do not say that it would be 
impossible ever to vanquish the latter, for 
under exceptional circumstances a small 
college might find itself possessed of a crew 
of athletes and a mint of money wherewith 
to back them up ; but we do say that, in the 
ordinary course of events, such an institu- 
tion cannot hope to row, with either Yale or 
Harvard, a race close enough to be interest- 
ing. 

The Cost of University Boat Racing . — The 
whole thing simply resolves itself into a 
matter of figures, and the figures so far as 
Yale is concerned, are these: The annual 
expenses of the general boating organization 
are about $2,000, and of the five clubs — one 
from each academical class, and one from 
the Scientific School — which compose it, as 
much more. This total of about $4,000 im- 
plies an average tax of about $6 on each of 
the six hundred men. Of late years, too, 
the University race can hardly have failed of 
costing the contestants $1,500 each, and the 
race of 1870 cost the Yaie crew more than 
$2,000. Of this amount $850 went for their 
board, $50 for their uniforms, $125 for their 
traveling expenses, $225 for their trainer, 
$400 for the boat in which the race was 
rowed, including its equipment and trans- 
portation ; and $400 for two other boats used 
in training. This was, to be sure, for sev- 
eral reasons, an unusually expensive year, 
but $1,500 may be set as the lowest estimate 
on which a six-oared shell crew can safely 
venture into a University race. It should 
also be borne in mind that Yale holds, free 
from debt, a $3,000 boat house, and has a 
prize-money income of $550, accruing to it 
each year from outside sources. The ad- 
vantages possessed bv the Harvard club are 
even greater, but its expenses are probably 
about as large as at Yale. In view of these 
facts, we think it plain enough that the two 
oldest, largest and richest colleges are the 
only ones that can be certainly relied upon 
to produce an uninterruped series of Uni- 
versity crews, year after year ; and that, in 
the long run, no other college crews can 
successfully contend against them. It is 
rather amusing, too, to those who under- 
stand the difficulty of maintaining a Univer- 
sity crew, to hear the cries of perplexity and 
disappointment arising from the colleges 
now going through their first experience in 
aquatics, over the “ sudden disablement of 
the boat,” or the “ unexpected sickness” of 
this or that oarsman, or the “ bad effects of 
favoritism and politics,” — as if all these 
things were not a part of the game, to be 


46 


Yale and Harvard Boat-Racing. 


accepted and provided for in advance, as 
matters of course. 

How the General College Races should be 
Managed. — The propriety of allowing only 
two colleges to contest in any single boat 
race seems to us so plain, that we shall not 
try to establish it by argument ; and, if this 
be taken for granted, no one can deny — quite 
aside from their assumed superiority in the 
pastime — that Harvard and Yale should row 
with each other, in preference to other col- 
leges, and that they also, by virtue of their 
positions as originators of the custom, 20 
years ago, should take the initiative in ma- 
king preparations for a University race, and 
inviting the younger colleges to appoint 
races with one another for the same time and 
place. We can think of at least seven pairs 
of colleges which might possibly, in one year 
or another, be induced to row together on 
the Thames course at New London, on the 
day of the University race. These are: 
Brown and Amherst, Dartmouth and Bow- 
doin, Princeton and Columbia, Williams and 
Cornell, Rutgers and Lafayette, Trinity and 
Wesleyan, Troy Polytechnic and Amherst 
Agricultural. We have grouped the names 
together somewhat carelessly, according to a 
vague idea to their being either about on a 
par in number of students or aquatic facili- 
ties, or else related in locality ; but of course 
the arrangement of pairs could be changed 
in any way that might seem good, — the object 
aimed at being to have two colleges which 
would row closely together, choose one 
another for contestants and renew the strug- 
gle annually, after the Yale and Harvard 
fashion. It seems to us that this project 
must commend itself to the good judgment 
of every one. It allows each pair of colleges 
to arrange the sort of race best suited to 
them. One pair, for example, might contest 
in a wherry race, single or double ; another 
in a barge race of four, six or eight oars ; 
another in a shell or gig race, and so on ; 
and the distance rowed might be one, two, 
three or four miles, as seemed best. Thus, 
many a college which could not afford to 
purchase an expensive 6-oared shell of the 
latest design, in order to row therein a hope- 
less race against Yale or Harvard, might be 
tempted into a friendly measuring of the 
oars with a rival of about its own size and 
aquatic strength, knowing that its exhibition 
of muscle, under the auspices of the Univer- 
sity race, would be viewed with approbation 
and interest by the assembled multitudes, 
who, if the same formed a part of that race, 
would look on with pity and contempt. So, 
too, the champion flags could be made of 
the “colors” of the two competing colleges, 
as suggested in the case of the University 
race, and both be renewed each year, as those 
have been hitherto. Thus, — while the com- 
plications, liable to attend any race in which 
there are more than two contestants, would 
all be avoided, — if it should happen that one 
of the younger colleges in a 6-oared shell 


race made better time than either Yale or 
Harvard, it would be sure to receive all the 
glory due the achievement ; while if it fell 
far behind them in time, the fact, not being 
evident to the eye, would attract no attention 
or ridicule. 

Scientific Undergraduates on the University 
Crezv of Yale? — Returning once more to the 
University race between Yale and Harvard, 
and considering the material allowed in ma- 
king up the crews, these things are to be 
thought of: Hitherto academical undergrad- 
uates alone have been admitted to the crew, 
partly because the number of them in the 
two colleges has been almost equal (Yale 
being slightly ahead until recently), while 
the professional-school students at Cam- 
bridge have far outnumbered those of New 
Haven ; but chiefly because the looser disci- 
pline of the schools would give opportunity 
to amateur or professional oarsmen, by keep- 
ing up the pretense of a connection with 
them, to get places upon the crew, and thus 
in time degrade the character of the races. 
Latterly, however, the two colleges have 
started off on different policies, — Harvard 
allowing “ scientific courses” and “elective 
studies” in its academical curriculum, and 
Yale establishing a three years’ undergrad- 
uate course in its Scientific School for those 
desiring to adopt the “ new education.” It 
appears probable, too, that for the next eight 
years or so, Harvard’s academical Freshmen 
will number 200, to Yale’s 150 academical 
and 25 scientific Freshmen. Hence, it would 
seem no more than fair if Harvard, restrict- 
ing its own choice as at present, should al- 
low Yale to pick its University six from 
among the two species of undergraduates, — 
the graduate and special students of the Sci- 
entific School being of course ruled out as 
before. However, until the scientific under- 
graduate course is extended over four 3mars, 
and the disparity between the academical 
classes in the two colleges becomes greater 
than now, it will hardly be worth Yale’s 
while to insist at all upon the point, if Har- 
vard objects in the least to yielding it. 

Concluding Appeal. — So much for our plan 
of conducting the aquatic contests between 
Yale and Harvard, and American colleges 
generally, in future years. We trust it will 
be fairly considered, and win a verdict on its 
own merits from the two parties to whom it 
is specially addressed. Both of them, we 
feel sure, are willing to forget the past, and 
begin next year a “new departure” in row- 
ing matters, by organizing a s)^stem which 
shall ensure an annual fair and square Uni- 
versity race. It has been our most earnest 
endeavor, in suggesting such a one, to speak 
honestly and without prejudice. We know 
that the appearance of our remarks in this 
present journal will not tend to recommend 
them unduly to the oarsmen of Yale; we 
hope that their appearance here will not of 
itself ensure their condemnation by the oars- 
men of Harvard. 



Tlic co3t of printing and distributing 500 copies of this pamphlet (which contains an 
amount of matter equivalent to that of an ordinary 12mo book of 100 pages) has proved 
to be over $150, while the receipts from sales, etc., have been but $30. 

The facts that the canvass for subscriptions, being made in the midst of examinations, 
was very incomplete ; that the day of publication July 12) was when many of the under- 
graduates had either left town or were taken up with more important matters; and that 
the character and object of the compilation were not rightly understood, doubtless com- 
bined to bring about this — for me — unfortunate result. 

In order, therefore, that my time and money may not be entirely wasted, I have 
decided to send through the mail, gratuitously, the greater part of the edition, — address- 
ing the copies chiefly to Yale undergraduates, — and to rely upon voluntary contributions 
for the making up, in part at least, of my pecuniary losses. 

Accordingly, if you find the pamphlet of any vaJUie to you on its own account, or 
approve of the motive which led me to issue it, or think that its general circulation will 
tend to put college boating on a better basis, I should like to have you send me either the 
price named upon its cover, or any larger or smaller sum which you may feel disposed 
to contribute. If you are a subscriber, I trust you will at least remit the amount origi- 
nally agreed upon, — whether 40 cts., 75 cts., or $1,— and in the latter case claim the ad- 
ditional copy or copies due you. 

If you have previously purchased the work, or if you do not care to keep the copy 
sent you, I would like to have you hand it to some one whom it would interest ; and if 
you desire any additional copies, either for yourself or others, I shall be glad to forward 
the same to any address, without expecting an y’additional money contribution in return. 
If you are a boating man, or particularly interested in boating matters, I should be 
pleased to learn your opinion of the plan proposed in the pamphlet for conducting col- 
lege races hereafter. 

All remittances and communications should be addressed to 

Lyman H. Bagg, 

West Springfield, Mass. 

Aug. 1, 1871. 


This year’s college races, on the Connecticut river, several miles above Springfield, 
were a wretched lizzie, and attracted hardly more than 2,000 si>ectators, all told,— 500 being 
the largest number at any single rendezvous. The course was three miles, down stream 
with the current. Wednesday night, July 13, the Atlantas beat the Harvards, 18.194 to 
19.224, — 63 seconds; while at the Saltonstall race of July 10 they beat the Yale Soph- 
omores (’73) by only 9 seconds,— 19.6] to 19.154. This was, therefore, a victory for Y"ale, 
in comparative time of 54 seconds, and even of absolute time, of 7 seconds, spite of the 
turning stake ! Friday, July 21, in the “ grand national college regatta ” of the “ rowing- 
association of American colleges” (15 of the 18 rowers being Massachusetts men), the 
Amherst Agricultural won, in 17.4G}, followed by the Harvards, in 18.28|, and the Browns 
in 18.47-4. Five days after the race, the time-keepers announced that, by a mistake in 
subtraction, they had added a minute to the times of each crew, and that the real times 
were therefore 1G.4G4, 17.284 and 17.474. The New Haven College Courant of July 29 
devoted eleven columns to reports and comments of the doings of “ regatta week.” 

For my own part, I hope that the Yale Boat Club, at the opening of the new college 
year, will ask Harvard to meet in convention at New London, for the purpose of estab- 
lishing there a permanent annual University race between the two colleges; if this is 
refused, then challenge Harvard for a straight-away, three-mile race at New London, 
Friday, July 13, 1872; and if this is also refused, then challenge the Amherst Agricultu- 
ral for a similar race, on the same day, either at New London or Springfield. Yale will 
thus be certain of securing a good race of some sort, without becoming involved in the 
absurd and unwieldy “rowing association of American colleges,” of which Harvard is 
already so heartily sick. L. H. B. 


\ 


HAVE BEEN ROWED BY THE WINNERS OF 90 RACES 
SINCE THEIR INTRODUCTION IN 1868, viz: 


14 in l§6§ 


20 ill I §09 


50 in 1§70. 


For racing and training, they are preferred to those of wood by the midshipmen 
at the U. S. Naval Academy, by numerous Boat Clubs, and by numbers of the best 
Oarsmen in the country. 

Our new Circular and Price List for 1871 is now ready, and will be mailed free 
on application by letter. It gives in full the contents table of our ANNUAL 
ILLUSTRATED CATALOGUE AND OARSMAN’S MANUAL FOR 1871, 
one Large Quarto Volume of 230 pages, printed in colors on tinted paper, con- 
taining fifty fine illustrations on wood, and four large folding plates (12 x 40 inches), 
strongly bound in muslin. Price, $3.00. 


BRIEF OF CONTENTS 


Introduction — Chapter I . — General history 
of rowing as a means of physical training, in 
England and the United States during the 
past fifty years. 

Chapter II . — General classification and de- 
scription of boats. Wooden and paper boats 
compared. General discussion of the details 
of racing boats. 


Part I . — Detailed description of all the 
different varieties of boats, oars and sculls 
built by us, fully illustrated. Including our 
new model 4-oared and 6-oared shells, built 
on the lines of the 4-oared boat used by the 
Tyne crew at Lachine, Ca., Sept. 14 1S70, 
taken from this boat after the race. Details 
of care and repair, cost of shipment, etc. 

Part II . — Hints to oarsmen on rowing and 
training. Books to be consulted. Best boats 
for beginners and adepts. Hints on the or- 


ganizations of boat clubs. Copies of the 
Constitution and By-Laws of five prominent 
clubs in the United States. 

Part III . — On boat racing. Rules adopted 
by the highest authorities. Races won by 
Paper Boats in 1868, ’69 and '70. Harvard 
vs. Yale, and Oxford vs. Cambridge races, 
and those of the most prominent Regatta 
Associations in the U. S. 

Part IV . — Complete list of the Boat and 
Rowing Clubs of the United States and Can- 
ada, on the 30th of November, 1870, with full 
details of each club in regard to their officers, 
organization, Constitution and By-Laws, 
Boat Houses, boats. Estimated value of 
property, and description of the course each 
uses for rowing. 

Part V. — Plans, sections, elevations, and 
descripiive details of Boat Houses, costing 
from $150 to $5000, with bill of material and 
all necessary data for building purposes. 

ATERS, BALCH & CO., 


303 River Street, Troy, N. Y. 


[Just Published.] 


JUN il fgog 


FOUR YEARS AT YALE. 

By a Graduate of ’69. 

12 mo, 728 pages, $2.50. 


The work professes to be “a complete and carefully classified handbook of all 
the facts relating to undergraduate life at Yale/’ and contains seventeen chapters, — 
three parts of five chapters each, an introductory and a concluding chapter. The 
former (50 pp.) is “ historical and explanatory” in its character, and the latter 
(20 pp.) presents “a matter of opinion” on what has gone before. 

Part I. (187 pp.) describes “the Society System,” devoting one chapter to the 
societies of each year, and a fifth to the “society institutions” of Linonia, Brothers, 
Phi Beta Kappa, etc. 

Part II. (306 pp.) describes “the Student Life,” and devotes one chapter to the 
customs of each year, and a fifth to general matters, under the name “ Town and 
Gown.” In the freshman year chapter. Thanksgiving Jubilee finds a place, in 
sophomore year is the Base Ball record, in junior year is a History of Boating, to 
which 75 pages are devoted, and in senior year an account of “Journalism,” and all 
the past and present periodicals published by the students. 

Part III. (145 pp. ) describes “the Official Curriculum,” and devotes one chap- 
ter each to “Studies,” “Marks,” “Honors,” “Manners” and “Shows.” 

The contents of each chapter in the book is fully indicated by extended sub-titles 
placed at its head, and an alphabetical index of over 600 references affords immedi- 
ate access to any desired subject. The book is not stereotyped, and in case a new 
edition should be called for, its form, arrangement, and subject matter will doubt- 
less be considerably changed. 

The contents table of 14 pages, containing the chapter head-lines and affording 
a more definite idea of the character of the work, may be obtained gratuitously on 
application to the publishers. 

The following are the sub-titles which refer to the History of Boating : 

The Decade Ending in 1853 — Organization of the Yale Navy — Catalogue of 
Boats — Formation of Permanent Boat Clubs in i860 — Their Boats — Adoption of 
the Present System in 1868-70 — Third List of Boats — Riker’s and the Boat House 
of 1859 — Dedication of the Present Boat House — Incorporation of the Navy — 
The Boat House Lease — Payment of the Debt by the Commodore of ’70 — The 
Annual Commencement Regattas, 1853—58 — The Fall Races, 1859-67 — Course of 
the Champion Flag, 1853—71 — The Regattas on Lake Saltonstall — The Phelps 
Barge Races and the Southworth Cup — Irregular Regattas, 1856—65 — Uniforms and 
Flags — Yale and Harvard — The First Period, 1852—60 — The Second Period, 1 8 64— 
70 — The Lesser Races of this Period — The Seven Great University Races — Re- 
gatta Day at Worcester — Student Rowdyism — Blue and Red — Betting — Dress, 
Training and Trainers — Attempt to Belittle Yale’s Triumph in 1865 — The Foul- 
ings of 1870, and the Resulting Complications — Refusal of Harvard to Answer the 
Challenge for 1 87 1 — The Seven University Crews. 

The book will be sent by mail to any address on receipt of price. 


H 87-79 


CHARLES C. CHATFIELD & CO., 





Publishers, 

New Haven, Conn. 































: W : 

. K.. ^ .4 





<A " ' t’' * 

v^ v ^ v 

aV** j © , 0 ^rv o * *V*^V fc 

/ ^ p* ^xSfir** <p ^ vvC^.* ^ **< 

‘ \> . . . A° . . P '*• ** A* .. <* * 




• 4 



«,- ^ »v^\F* 4> •> *. 

P o '«.*■* A <v *-7V. ' ., 

> Vv?^> ’ . o .p 0° ♦* 



> . ■ ♦ * v* * . o 


° *° ■% 


■«4. 

^ a? •!*“' > V *L^L'* 

■ ^ ^ % P * **. 

- 'M&Wb,. **v 

• «v«*> ,<j^ 

.V 4- 


\0 VY 

> _ * ^ * 

© N O ' K> * t 1 

yf 




P ^ 



<0 »’*»- %> V * 

S P y ^ * 

° V//'9^\W * -* ^Mlfi^ ° 

^ ^ oVi^\K * av ">y . * <p 

Y v-— •> <.*?$<•<>♦ 

0^ . • \1* * . Y p .‘J^*, ^ f 0* ,•■■-*’ P 

- Y. A -* 




m > •y'. 

» *#V 4 * 

• ^ o 

* 4 o. 

> -a? ^ u 

’* P rv * 

s> » ' ’ * <y °-i. * » » ° a 1 

^ V ’ 1 Ja^t^ + ^>. <0 t* * 






O' 


~ * ft 

t « o^ ^ -»> * • • 


I > v-tv v> 



i0 ^ 


O U O 


1 * 


V ** V 'x, CV .O r 



* & % • 


o 

o V 




.0 & *»“*''• . » «. 

<y 

^ </ .'Jfc fa % A 

vOV* •J§S^ 0 %« V^ v 





° v> 'V ° , 
* a** o 1 

' .v *. • 


<>* .-&■ o 

O V 


* .A 3 O 

% A, v • 

v r ^ _> -#♦* ,0 w • 

/ e o-^ .*'•♦ **b 

\ * '^\\v!Y^u * ^ * mi //?? • , 

* *P» 4 V>* . A 

. ^ Cr • " OK 


- V ° r 

aV 

> V *’>• % 

/v. * ^S?C<I /yw>s_ «•> 


> 


^ & * 
v* v 

^'V * 

> ^ % K y - 4 
ir <>. '■>•** A . . 

<*_ A> o" o, ^ 


* ^ ^ * 


,4 , 

*fe v 4 : 


*«• <*> A> * v 

: **<& : 

4> v 

A-* »> 1 

* -V sP *. 

« v) ^ ° * * < f ' \ j, ’ • ♦ 

0 ^ 0 °V* ^ 


* / > • 
4 A ^ 


O N O 


0 \P * 7 *» " V 

1 ' * 

A. 0 <s> 9 ' 1 . V 

■^/v ^ »jK\^^//l,° 0 \£. A <; ' » -p *’ 

VA ' _- 


* -Tj. 

IA 4 

. ^ c^ 


C 




^ ^ \ 




^ ' <L V <p> * 

^ A° '••» 

*% C° °o 

* ^ V - * 

^ 0^ - 


1 * 


, • C^-'V 

r * A 5 V, o « 
' .V <P, 


,0 .'-'•* o 


O, J, o.*'» 


O v 


^ *♦ / 
VV 


- ’r. a t> < 

*„ ^ ,<^ 
r O' 9 


O 


> * A^^ - 

• <r % • 


*' «,► o % ._ 

' • • ’ * <r %, * * »° a ' 3 

"' ^ V% ^ » ’ * °* 

v o .* iJter*, \/ 




& -S ^0, O 



o V 


C, ^ vfk 

r * ^A 5 <P\ o 

^ ^ ^ 7..' <6 V 

^ .‘-A^% V G°* ,v^4 ’ °o ^ . 


* 4^ ^ • 





O N 0 


o \0 * 7 % 

- * ‘ 

0 n 0 ^ \% O. 

.0 V, "’ aV 

i v . y • o ^ ^ 





r, a “£>- 

^ / * 


A' V • 





rp A v 
VV 


<1^ 0 

* A' 'P', 0 

' <? <#V • 





* - 



° ^ A^ * 

° vr^v o 




• $ % ° 


V] 




,-i? .oj^ % 


«J A N 79 


>° ^° ^ 



<o J °^ 

<* *'-'•* A & ^ ^ * 

^ r o^ *0 

Vj ♦ 



N. MANCHESTER, 
INDIANA 46962 


0 M O 


r ^ y * °- 



- o 


Vf> 


C^' »>vVA° ^ A^ V \n c/ 








